Tuesday, June 30, 2009

The Importance Of Hospital Culture, And How Much More Likely Are You To Survive As Happy's Patient?

________________________________ 13 Outbursts

Aggravated DocSurg explains the importance of hospital culture as he disects data from the ACS Surgery News


To draw on the current phraseology of hospital management-types, it boils down to culture. Hospitals with lower mortality rates, I suspect, aggressively engender a culture of high expectations, where everyone down the line understands how important of a role they play on the team. High expectations come with accountability, and the squishiness of some administrators when it comes to meting out that accountability can lead to poor outcomes. That accountability must also apply to the physicians, and a physician culture that demands the best for our patients in our hospitals --- from the physicians and staff alike --- pays big dividends.


When you expect little, you get little in return.  I have full faith in the abilities of most folks at Happy's hospital that come in contact with patients in one way or another.  That which I am not trained to handle, I leave for others more educated than I.  As an internist trained hospitalist, the volume of disease I am capable of handling is immense.  My limits are well known to me.  And when they are met, I act accordingly.

Physicians also play an important role in following  protocols designed for patient safety.  If you have infection control policies in place that require full shield protection while placing central lines, the policies do no good if the physicians do not follow them.  If you have good policies in place to prevent venous thromboembolism (VTE), they do no good if the physicians are not active participants.   Physicians must be willing participants, along with everyone else, in a culture of excellence.

I can say, without a doubt, there are some physicians that don't want to do the right thing for patient care.  Eventually, those physicians will be found out.  If they don't want to prevent  VTE in their patients, their numbers will eventually prove their failure.  If they don't want to barrier protect their patients from infection, their numbers will eventually prove their failure.

On a personal note, I am happy to report that my data is exceptional.  If you were taken care of by me, you were 50% less likely to die than your severity of illness adjusted expected mortality would have suggested.  Every year I get a report indicating my actual mortality % vs expected mortality %.   Some of this can be manipulated by how well I document, compared to the rest of the physician universe.  I understand the documentation rules very well.  That may, to some degree, skew my data when compared with the physician universe.  But so what.  It's accurate data.  And it's accurate when comparing me against my own data.  If my patient is sick, I document exactly how sick they are.

So how do my numbers look?  Well,  in 2008, 355 cases were evaluated.   The severity of illness adjusted expected mortality for my patients was 5.7%.   This compared with the national database numbers of 5.1%.  But how often did my patients die?  5%?  4%?  3%?  None of the above.

My patients died only 2.8% of the time.  Less than half my patients who were expected to die, did.   How did I compare with the rest of Happy's hospitalist group?  Despite having a higher severity of illness (which may be due to better documentation), I beat them out too with an actual mortality of 2.8% vs 4.5% for Happy's entire hospitalist group.  So not only are my patients dying 50% less often than would be expected, patients in my entire hospitalist group are dying 12% less often than would be expected when compared with national statistics.

Hospitals with strong safety initiatives and a culture of compliance with those initiatives from all players, including physicians, separate good hospitals from great ones.  And physicians that practice sound clinical medicine can expect more of their patients to survive their acute illness, despite all the barriers to their survival.  Quality will come from within, not from the government.  How many bad mothers do you know out there on welfare?  How many bad mothers do you know not on welfare?  What makes a good mother is the mother, not the government.

So what does it all mean?  If you should ever find yourself as a patient on my service, you can sleep well at night knowing that your chance of dying is 50% less than if the average physician in this country cared for you.  And should you ever find yourself admitted to Happy's hospitalist service , you can sleep well at night knowing that if you don't get me as your physician, at the least, you have a 12% less chance of dying during your stay than the average patient in the average hospital being taken care of by the average physician in this soon to be average country.

How Fast Can A Bear Run?

________________________________ 3 Outbursts

I was told by several bystanders, the bear can run up to 35 miles per hour.  A good reason why the laws in the Yellowstone are post 100 yards as the closest allowable distance to approach a bear.  On several occasions whole herds of wild humans would congregate on the side of the road to view the bears in action.    And everyone kept their distance.  At least 100 yards.  


Except this guy, Mr. Bear Food.


Here we all were. About 50 of us all standing back, well over 100 yards, with our cameras at maximum zoom. And Mr. Bear Food walks farther and farther and farther, finally resting up against a tree no more than 30 yards from the hungry bear. Everyone is yelling at him to get back. He's just smiling away. Mr. Bear Food had no idea how many people had their video camera on trigger waiting for a chance to get a real life bear attack in action. Whom ever you are Mr Bear Food,



today was your lucky day.

Is It Time To Shut Down Medical Schools In Favor of Nursing School?

________________________________ 6 Outbursts

Dr Rich gives his in depth analysis of the news behind the AMNews.


While apparently Mary Mundinger (DrPH, RN, dean of the Columbia University School of Nursing, President of CACC, and bugaboo of physicians everywhere) did not make herself available to the AMANews for a direct response, she was quoted in an earlier article as saying, “If nurses can show they can pass the same test at the same level of competency, there’s no rational argument for reimbursing them at a lower rate or giving them less authority in caring for patients.”

If students of nursing can pass the same competencies, in their entirety, as their MD  counter parts, they should receive the same rights as physicians to practice in equivalent scopes of practice.  Which means they should take the certification presented by the  American Board of Internal Medicine.  And if the ABIM is shown to be too difficult, physicians should certify by the standards established by their counterpart nursing boards.    

Having  two different certification standard to practice in the same scope of practice is simply irrational.  

With equality defined in internal medicine, DNPs should also be allowed to pursue specialized training, should they desire, in new specialized tracks of training, called Doctor of Nursing Cardiology, Doctor of Nursing Gastroenterology, Doctor of Nursing Endocrinology, Doctor of Nursing Nephrology ( you get the point).  And once complete with their training, they should be allowed to sit for the certification exams presented by the American College of Cardiology, Gastroenterology, Endocrinology, Nephrology and on and on.  If these exams are shown to be too difficult for doctor nurses,  medical doctors of cardiology, gastroenterology, endocrinology and nephrology should be allowed to certify by the standards established by the doctor of nursing specialty societies in order to allow doctor nurses equality of standards. 

Given the mantra of equal training,  and showing that nurse training is equivalent in scope and practice to the specialty of internal medicine, cardiology, gastroenterology, endocrinology and nephrology, nurses  should also be allowed to pursue a new doctor of surgical nursing degree.   Proving once again that a higher nursing education is equivalent to medical education, they should be allowed to prove competency by sitting for board certification presented by the  American College of Surgeons, becoming equals with their MD surgical counterparts.


You see, there is nothing inherently different between the American College of Cardiology, the American College of Surgery and the American Board of Internal Medicine.  They are all certifiers of physicians in their field of expertise.   Each a speciality in their own right.   If nurses believe they can practice internal medicine in its entirety with their nursing degree, there is no reason for me to believe they don't also believe they can also practice cardiology and surgery, in its entirety with their nursing equivalent degree.    

Whether they choose to or not is irrelevant.  Should a nurse wish to pursue specialized training in cardiology or surgery and become certified as equals as their MD counter parts, I believe America owes it to patients and nurses alike to offer them this opportunity.  

Which is why I favor closing all medical schools immediately and broadly expanding nursing admissions to provide for the new wave of doctor nurses who can provide full scopes of internal medicine, cardiology, gastroenterology, endocrinology, nephrology and surgery.  To deny doctor nurses the opportunity to certify as equals in all these fields would be denying patients and doctor nurses alike the rights earned by nature of their training to practice in scopes determined to be equal as their MD counterparts.

If the educational outcome is the same, then as a country, we should be paying for the cheaper education.  That means it's time to shut down all medical schools for good and use the nursing model of care as the only model of care to evaluate and manage patient illness.

How Does A 98 Year Old Present To The ED?

________________________________ 4 Outbursts




I snapped this picture in a public ED.  I could hear the lady checking in.  She's 98 year's old.  And she presented to the ED by private auto.  Wheeled up to the front desk.  Checked in.  And waited her turn in line.


It's not every day you make it to 98 and you're not coming cutting in line by way of ambulance.  

The Supreme Court Rules It's Illegal To Discriminate Against Whites

________________________________ 2 Outbursts

Why did it take the Supreme Court to decide discrimination against whites was illegal?


The Supreme Court ruled Monday that white firefighters in New Haven, Conn., were unfairly denied promotions because of their race, reversing a decision that high court nominee Sonia Sotomayor endorsed as an appeals court judge.

New Haven was wrong to scrap a promotion exam because no African-Americans and only two Hispanic firefighters were likely to be made lieutenants or captains based on the results, the court said Monday in a 5-4 decision. The city said that it had acted to avoid a lawsuit from minorities.


Punishing whites because minorities failed to meet the standards of the job is a form of racism.  We can argue till the cows come how about the disparities in minority opportunity.  But it doesn't change the fact that standards are in place for a reason.  Is it acceptable to lower the standards for a defined  job for the sole purpose of increasing minority participation?  By doing so, you are making the presumption that minorities are by default less capable.  That in itself is a racist idea and lowers the standards for all to participate.  This mentality is a race to the bottom.

Let's take medical school for example.  If the minimum requirement at Harvard  was a 30 on your MCAT and a 3.5 GPA, would you keep out a white student with a 4.0 GPA and a 35 on their MCAT because not enough blacks meet the standard admission criteria?  Of course not.  If there cannot be equal standards for all, there should not be any standards at all. Setting different standards based on race is in itself racism.  Punishing one race for their success because another race failed to meet the required standards is racism.  

And the Supreme Court got it right.  It's just too bad it took the High Court to see that.

Monday, June 29, 2009

Cooper's First Buffalo

________________________________ 9 Outbursts


click image to enlarge

Should Emergency Physicians Be Given Immunity From Lawsuits?

________________________________ 21 Outbursts

Chris Seper over at Medcity News discusses effort underway in his own backyard to do just that.


Ohio is the latest state to introduce new legislation that would dramatically increase the legal standard to win a civil suit against a doctor working at an emergency department. It also offers the same protection for doctors helping after floods, tornadoes or other disasters.

The bill says physicians would have qualified civil immunity while working in emergency rooms and be subject only to lawsuits if they showed “willful or wanton misconduct” — a high standard for liability usually reserved to determine punitive damages.

The Ohio bill would specifically apply to services being provided under EMTALA regulations. I would interpret that to mean any physician taking care of a patient that was seen or admitted to the hospital through the emergency room would be protected by this higher standard.  That includes hospitalists and all other subspecialists that care for hospitalized patients admitted through the emergency room.  I can't recommend admission on an ED patient and then sign off.  By default, that makes me fall under the same rules as an ED doc.  

And how does the lawyer respond?

Emergency room physicians are protected already, as long as they act within the concept of the standard of care, and don’t deserve an exception beyond what other physicians receive, Lansdowne said. “They can be wrong, and as long as they act in accordance with standard of care, they are not liable,” he said.

The only problem I see in today's malpractice environment is the irrational standard of care that has been established, not by science, but rather by the fear of the lawsuit itself.  Everyday of my life I see head CTs ordered on patients with drug overdoses because they are acting funny.  Should that be the standard of care?  Of course not.  Is it?  Yes.  Because just one of those patients may have fallen or bumped their head and experienced a subdural hematoma.  In the six years I've been practicing as a hospitalist, most of my patients who  have been admitted to my service with altered mental status and a drug overdose have had a CT scan.  A normal CT scan.  Now, I fear the doctor who doesn't order one on that one patient who has a bleed AND a drug overdose.  They're toast.  And because they're toast, everyone gets a CT scan.  That's the standard.   But it shouldn't be.  And it's a legally driven mentality that feeds on itself.  All us docs know the likelihood of having a drug overdose AND a head bleed as the cause of the altered mental status is minuscule.  But none of us are willing to be the doc who doesn't order it just that once and be wrong.  

When the standard of care in a community is the wrong standard;  when it's based on fear rather than science, everyone loses, except the lawyers.  It's time to discard standard of care as the legal basis for malpractice in this country.  And find something that isn't bankrupting our country.  What's the answer?  You tell me.


How To Survive In Primary Care And It's Not By Playing Doctor

________________________________ 1 Outbursts

It is kind of sad that taking care of the whole patient and serving as a well trained comprehensive doctor is at the bottom of the desirability food chain of medicine. Hospitals and multi-specialty medical groups see primary care physicians as "lost leaders". We have become the "oil change" of medicine, so the big ticket "engine overhaul" can be captured by the high dollar procedures.

Dr Brayer describes how to survive primary care.  And it's not by doing playing doctor.  That's really sad.  

I Can Do CPR With One Hand Tied Behind My Back

________________________________ 1 Outbursts

Strange indeed


I've done CPR on some pretty frail elderly.  I can't say I've ever seen it done one handed.  

A Reanalysis Of Gawande's Research

________________________________ 0 Outbursts

McAllen, Texas is the mother ship for the Medicare National Bank. A culture of care that is bankrupting our country. Or so we think. The ladies and gents over at the Health Care Blog analyzed the data. And came to a very different conclusion.

McAllen is different from many areas of the United States: it is sicker and poorer. The observed differences in the rates of chronic disease are highest for those conditions rampant in low income American populations: diabetes and heart disease. Further, Medicare beneficiaries in McAllen have significantly higher rates of co-occurring chronic conditions. As a result the costs of caring for McAllen Medicare population appears high in comparison to other areas but not abnormally so. McAllen suffers from a tremendous burden, but it not caused by its physicians: the care they provide leads to costs that are substantially comparable to the other counties in the article once adjustments are made for the magnitude of the health problems they face. The disturbing pattern of physician practices uncovered by Dr. Gawande sounds a warning not because it foretells a McAllen-like future but because it portrays the on-going crisis that affects both McAllen and Grand Junction and it is national in scope. Physician culture is only part of the McAllen story.


They did some great analysis of the data to come to these conclusions. They showed that the expenditures out of McAllen in patients without diabetes, heart disease or heart failure was not out of the ordinary.

My own analysis? Before I could conclude that an over treat culture of care in McAllen doesn't exist, I would like to see the data, not on patients without these three diseases, but rather expenditure data on patients WITH diabetes, heart failure and heart disease and corrected for poor status (who's poor health is directly related to smoking status). These are the patients for which medical care is expensive. These are the proceduralized patients. Telling me that healthy folks in McAllen cost no more than healthy folks in Colorado doesn't mean anything. Tell me a rich diabetic with heart failure and a history of MI costs more in McAllen than in Colorado. Now, that's meaningful information.

Bizarre Brain Research: Optogenetics

________________________________ 0 Outbursts

I reader pointed me to some crazy brain research. Optogenetics.

Optogenetics uses a brain cell switch with two genetic parts. The first is a gene taken from an algae that activates the cell in the presence of blue light in order to turn towards the light and photosynthesis. In a neuron, that activation fires the cell. The second is from an archaeon, a salt-based extremophile, which responds to yellow light by pumping chlorideions. In a brain cell, that means not firing at all.

I wonder how many RVU's that would pay?

Sunday, June 28, 2009

What's It Like To Be A Nurse?

________________________________ 20 Outbursts

A nurse tells it like it is


My name is not Catharine. My name is "Nurse!" Not "Nurse?" Or "Nurse." But "Nurse!" Sometimes "Nuuurrrrsssse!!!!" That is what I'm called by the patients (if they can talk), their families, the doctors, social workers, dietitians, respiratory therapists, chaplains, visitors, physical therapists, everybody calls me "Nurse!" I'd sooner be called c*nt, b*tch, f*ckface or wh*re because calling me "Nurse!" amounts to a Master calling a slave. And slave I am.

And no one is just a nurse. For all the nurses out there, I respect the nursing work you do. It's one of the toughest jobs in health care. I for one could never do it.

I Got Offered $1000...

________________________________ 7 Outbursts

to give a "lecture" on Invanz. I was told I would be given the slides to do the lecture AND it would only take about 15 minutes.

It's not OK to give a doctor a pen, but it is OK to pay them a $1000 in consulting fees. I find this whole thing preposterous.

I turned them down due to my busy schedule. The question is, would you?

Caption Contest

________________________________ 8 Outbursts

Keep Coming Back For More

________________________________ 8 Outbursts

I'd like to thank my loyal readers for tuning in on all of my daily offerings. According to Google Analytics you keep coming back for more. In the last 30 days

15% of you have visited more than 100 times
17% of you have visited 25-100 times
13% of you have visited 5-25 times

In other words almost 1/2 of you keep coming back over and over again. Of the remaining 1/2, 30% of you have visited just once. All those poor people missing out on the truth...

100,000 Patients A Year Are Killed By Lack Of Ambu Access

________________________________ 6 Outbursts

Michael Jackson is dead. In a follow up post I discussed the dangers of IV narcotics, praised nurses for preventing more deaths than I would expect with its use, discussed my own experience with the dangers of IV narcotics, and reported on my nurse coordinator's suspicion that MJ died at the hands of fibromyalgia.

In a follow up post, after an N=12 trial at Happy's hospital, I discussed the lack of critical access to life saving Ambu bags in patient rooms. I suggested that having Ambu bags in every room was not a standard practice in hospitals all across this bankrupt country of ours. The response has been overwhelmingly one of concern for the safety of patients at Happy's hospital. Concern that life saving access to Ambu bags is being compromised in favor of profit.

I took these concerns to heart. I spent all day yesterday researching outcomes data as it relates to having Ambu bags in patient rooms. What I found was shocking (like Dateline shocking). I am now a converted believer. I want to thank all my readers for my new crusade in life.

What I found was unacceptable in the magic of American health care. Study after study points to an epidemic of hospital acquired Ambu death. The literature suggested 125 randomized controlled trials comparing Ambu bags in the mop closet vs Ambu bags in every patient room. A meta-analysis of all trials, suggested that 100,000 hospitalized patients a year are dying due to lack of Ambu access.

Starting monday, I will be contacting all appropriate government agencies and major news organizations to let them know of this hospital crises sweeping America. And I will be starting my own organization, paid for with Ambu advertising, to push for a national quality initiative to put Ambus in every patient room in America.

And I shall call it Happy's Attempt At Helping Ambu Access

Saturday, June 27, 2009

Is It Reasonable To Stock Every Hospital Room With Emergency Rescusitation Supplies

________________________________ 37 Outbursts

A post I wrote yesterday touched a nerve with many ghosts of the night. Many suggested I was failing my duties as a physician for leaving the bedside of a patient to gather the support team for resuscitation efforts, suggesting instead I should have started bagging the patient myself, while I yell outside for help. Or, (as I suggested a once in a lifetime experience)to pull the code blue chord myself.

So I took a little survey on my rounds today. I rounded on 15 patients today. Excluding my ICU patients, I counted the number of Ambu bags that were stocked in my other 12 patient rooms . I searched high and low. Room after room. I opened closets. I opened drawers. I searched every where. Guess how many I found.

Zero. Zip. Nadda. Zilch. Nul.

I talked with a respiratory therapist and asked him where they are. He said they are stocked in one supply closet on every floor. The only places they are stocked in every room are the ICU and the ED.

One reader suggested this was unacceptable hospital policy. That I should contact the "Vice President of Patient Care" to change such as dastardly policy as it represented a patient safety issue. I would suggest this reader has minimal exposure to inpatient medicine and the economics of inpatient medicine.

Stocking an Ambu bag in every room ain't gonna happen. It ain't gonna happen in just about every hospital in this country, except the really rich ones. It is not reasonable, nor rational to have a fully stocked ICU in every patient room of a hospital, in spite of what some wish to believe. I might also add that Happy's Hospital is a level one trauma center, cardiac center, cancer center, neurosurgical center, whatever center. You can get everything at Happy's hospital. I do not work at a rinky dink hospital in the middle of no where with one ventilator and a part time physician that only works M-F from 8am to noon. We have it all, and we don't stock Ambu bags. That is a reality. Because it is the right reality.

It's hard to bag someone without a bag. I'm ready to accept y'all apologies at any time. Those angry at me for not bagging the patient, have been lead astray by forces not familiar with inpatient medicine. If you want the truth on inpatient medicine, stick with me. If you want outsiders opinions on inpatient medicine, go somewhere else.

As for the nursing staff, Happy's nursing team did an excellent job that day saving that patient's life. I take great pleasure in knowing that many of them excel in their duties and responsibilities on their floor duties as a nurse, a job harder than just about every other field of medicine. I have great confidence in many of them for the expertise in nursing related patient care issues and I would trust most of them with my life.

Friday, June 26, 2009

Do You Treat Lawyer Patients Differently?

________________________________ 18 Outbursts

If a patient tells you they are a lawyer, how does that affect your evaluation process?

Be honest.

The Four Most Expensive Words In The Goat Rodeo Known As American Healthcare

________________________________ 10 Outbursts


Why does a 92-year-old man with less than a fifty-fifty chance of living another year get an expensive colonoscopy?  I mean, it had better be a good reason.  Rectal bleeding.  Something like that.

“It was a screening colonoscopy,” said the consultant, “We removed a polyp.”

According to Panda Bear the four most expensive words in all of American health care are "Just to be safe".

I have used that line frequently.  And each time I do, I internally rationalize whether the tests I am recommending will ultimately affect my management decisions for my patients and whether those decisions have the ability to change the outcomes of my patient.  If we physicians cannot defend our medical decisions based on sound scientific principles, in the correct clinical scenario, we are part of the problem.    

The more we screw America, the more we screw ourselves.  If we are going to stick an endoscope in a 92 year old,  we are part of the problem.  

Michael Jackson May Have Died From Fibromyalgia

________________________________ 69 Outbursts

Dr Kevin is reporting that Michael Jackson may have died after receiving a dose of Demerol (generic meperidine). Demerol has all but been banned from Happy's Hospital. If any patient comes in on it our pharmacists are on me like a hawk to change it to something else, especially in our elderly population. It has metabolites that hang around and can cause bad side effects. It is also used by many folks to get high (apparently to a different degree than other narcs).

As I mentioned in my post on Michael's death, I'm not convinced it was a "heart attack" as some news outlets are reporting. He just doesn't fit the profile for coronary artery disease. With that said narcotic drug overdose is certainly a plausible explanation for his death.

Let me give you a story. I was doing my normal daily rounds on a patient when I walked in and just stopped. I stopped and I listened. I looked for signs of life in my 67 year old man who was admitted with abdominal pain. I stood there. Watching. Calmly observing.

It struck me as odd. For a full thirty seconds I saw my patient breath exactly one time. I turned on the lights and noted a remarkable physical finding (another reason to always turn on the lights). Cyanosis. A physical finding in which the skin turns purple due to an increase in deoxyhemoglobin in the capillaries (I will never forget the cause of cyanosis due to my exposure to one of the greatest pimping attendings of all times).

So I calmly walked out of the room, walked to the nurses station and stated calmly:

"One of my patients is about to code. What would you like me to do?"

This is probably the quickest way to get a nurse to jump out of their chair and come bedside to your assistance. I think in retrospect I lost the golden opportunity of a lifetime to pull the code chord and watch every nurse on that floor flock to my room with me standing there saying

"What would you ladies and gentleman like to do about my dying patient?"

This patient, perhaps just like Michael Jackson, was heading to Heaven at the hands of IV morphine, being used to treat an abdominal pain which certainly would not take his life. It was nurse administered, not patient controlled analgesia (the pain pump or better known as the PCA). Not every patient will respond equally to the same dose of medication. No matter how many protocols or protections are in place, we can not prevent 100% of our patients from not experiencing an adverse event. This is one such example. The fact that only a handful of my patients a year experience a complication from IV narcotics is a pat on the back to Happy's Hospital for getting rigorous safety protocols in place.

A PCA is a pump filled with narcotic, set to only deliver a maximum amount of medicine every defined period of time, which is activated by a button the patient carries near them. If the machine is set to only allow one dose every eight minutes, pushing the button a hundred times in eight minutes will only deliver one dose in eight minutes. The beauty of the PCA is that as the patient gets sleepy, the patient stops pushing the button. This is why family should NEVER EVER EVER nor should nurses NEVER EVER EVER push the PCA button for the patient. If they cannot push their own button, they should not have a PCA and nurse administered narcotics should be the route of choice.

My patient had nurse administered narcotics. Several times a year, for just me, I will have patients who experience life threatening respiratory depression from intravenous (and sometimes even oral) doses of narcotics. They are not to be taken lightly. The antagonist for narcotic overdose is Narcan. Sometimes multiple doses must be administered as it gets "consumed". Most patients will wake up very quickly, often in a fit of rage and delirium and no long standing side effects are experienced.

However, sometimes if the respiratory depression consumes the patient, irreversible cardiac ischemia or deadly arrythmias may present themselves, leading to the patient's death. It's the same reason heroin addicts die. They suppress the breathing centers of their brain and they stop breathing. A heroin overdose, is in fact quite a peaceful way to die.

I think I've delved into my hospitalist experience with IV narcotics enough. I think the real question needs to be asked. Why is any doctor prescribing and administering daily Demerol to any one, Michael Jackson or otherwise. Happy's nurse coordinator believes he may have had fibromylagia.

How's that for the official cause of death. Michael Jackson, dead at the age of 50, from fibromyalgia.

Yellowstone In Spring

________________________________ 1 Outbursts


A mama and her calf own the road.  A beautiful sight to see. (click image to enlarge)

The Doctish English Phrase Book

________________________________ 4 Outbursts

Dr Hal Dal brings us an up to date explanation of what doctors really mean when they open their mouths.

My favorite You will experience some discomfort. (really means) This will hurt a lot.


America Responds: Who Is Responsible For Rising Health Care Costs?

________________________________ 2 Outbursts

From the Economist.com (via PointofLaw.com via overlawyered's Twitter)

Insurance companies are to blame from 42% of respondants
Trial lawyers are to blame from 24% of the respondants
Washington is to blame from 20% of respondants.

Fascinating. Insurance companies (like every third party) isn't without its problems. But, exactly how are insurance companies to blame? When you wreck your Ford focus and it costs $1000 to repair the bumper, is that the fault of State Farm? Insurance companies collect money from you, take a small cut, and then pay for your neighbor with the 30 medical problems to sit on her couch smoke cigarettes, eat Cheetos and watch Oprah.

The public has no idea how inefficient our health care is because of the massive government regulatory structures in place that demand inefficiency. A self fulfilling spiral of financial doom that feeds on itself and guarantees millions of Americans jobs for no other purpose than to support the bloated structure known as American health care.

The public's perception and the reality of the situation are in need of a major educational initiative.

Thursday, June 25, 2009

What Killed Michael Jackson?

________________________________ 10 Outbursts

The news says it was a heart attack.  I'm not so sure.  There are so many variables here, it's hard to know where to begin.  First of all, in medical jargon, physicians often think of a heart attack as a myocardial infarction, a condition where a sudden occlusion of a major arterial vessel to the heart results in a loss of oxygen to valuable heart muscle.  There is a whole spectrum of ischemic disease.  It can start with stable angina, a relatively benign condition that can be managed for years with appropriate medications and elective procedures.  More concerning is unstable angina, or chest pain or its anginal equivalent that generally occurs at rest.  Most physicians would consider unstable angina a reason for admission and close hospital monitoring.  


Progressing farther along the cardiac spectrum, non ST elevation MI occurs when lack of oxygen to the heart results in damage to heart muscle that results in leakage of cardiac specific enzymes into the blood stream.  It is this cardiac marker, the troponin, that physicians use to measure the presence or absence of cardiac muscle death.  The lack of ST segment elevation generally means that the damage is not transmural.  In other words, the full thickness of the heart is not being compromised.  This can is also generally managed in the hospital as a non life threatening condition.  And depending on the clinical scenario treatment can include medications, PCI, surgery or a combination of the three.

The ST segment elevation MI is the emergency that kills.  How quickly you intervene has everything to do with life or death.  ST segment is an ECG finding that indicates  trans mural, or complete thickness death of the cardiac muscle.  With out specialized interventions, either tPA or PCI, the patient will have a high probability of severe morbidity or death.

So, did Michael Jackson have a "heart attack", classically understood by physicians as a myocardial infarction (MI)?  I don't know.  The most important risk factors for acute MI are:

  • diabetes
  • hypertension
  • hyperlipidemia
  • smoking
  • central obesity/inactivity
  • family history
  • history of vascular disease in other sources

Other less common but still relevant causes include
  • systemic inflammatory disease such as autoimmune conditions (lupus, rheumatoid arthritis)
  • illicit drugs (meth, cocaine)
  • coagulopathy (perhaps antiphospholipid antibody syndrome)
  • radiation exposure
  • untreated hyper or hypothyroidism
  • prinzmetal's angina
There are many others but these are most common.

Mr Jackson, on the surface doesn't appear to have major risk factors for premature coronary artery disease that could lead to an early MI.  I've never seen him smoke.  His family all appears free of heart disease.  He is physically active.  He probably does not have diabetes, nor hypertension.  His cholesterol status is unknown.  He very well may have an autoimmune disorder as he has claimed to have many ailments over the years.  However, having systemic lupus would make it quite difficult for him to lead an active lifestyle as he has.

While possible, I'm not convinced it was an MI per say that killed him.  I think the more likely cause may have been sudden cardiac death, not by infarction  of one or more blood vessels , but rather by a global hypoxemia caused by a deadly arrhythmia, most notably ventricular tachycardia or ventricular fibrillation.  Now, either rhythm can be initiated by a myocardial infarction, or they can be a primary source of death.

Someone with intrinsic coronary artery disease is more likely to have VT or VF than someone without, but VT and VF can occur in those with out active ischemia or infarction.  QT prolongation or other genetic arrythmogenic conditions could have caused his demise.  Hypertrophic obstructive cardiomyopathy could have as well.    Street drugs, herbs,  supplements and prescription drugs could all initiate a deadly arrhythmia.  

The autopsy will be helpful to determine the extent of coronary artery disease, if any.  If he appears clear of underlying chronic disease, one would have to start looking towards more acute causes.   Drug overdose. Primary respiratory failure.  Pulmonary embolism (he does travel quite a bit).  The information on the field will be helpful ( in terms of what the cardiac rhythms were), what he was doing when he collapsed, any discussion with folks around him right before he collapsed.  It can all be pieced together to get a final cause as the most likely cause of death.

Because, as all physicians know, cardiopulmonary arrest is not an appropriate cause of death.  

I've Never Seen A Tomato Tree This Big

________________________________ 3 Outbursts


From sister Happy's garden comes the biggest tomato tree I have ever seen.  Now, if yours is bigger than mine, send me a pic and I'll post it for all the world to see.

The Truth About Canadian Medicine

________________________________ 11 Outbursts

You may think all is well in Canada. A land where FREE=MORE has been granted a birth right. It has been said many times before: You have three endpoints for which to strive for. Cheap, Quality or Quick. Pick any two. You can not have all three. It seems that Canada has decided to sacrifice Quick. You can always guarantee cheap health care. You simply stop paying for it. That's called rationing. Getting in line and waiting is a classic form of rationing used by governments all across this land of ours.

In fact, as a resident in training at a VA facility, I saw first hand how rationing of care occurred using waiting as the tool of choice. Schedules blocked at 5-8 patients. Leaving when the clock struck 4. Scheduling dead patients. Yes folks, that actually happened. As an inpatient, technologists would finish their day on their terms. Getting studies after hours was impossible. Patients would wait for days to get an echo or a doppler. I once had an xray technologist refuse to come in, from home, in the middle of the night to take a chest xray on a crashing ventilator patient. The fact that the VA would not staff an overnight xray technologist was simply ridiculous. Try to get anything done on a holiday. Not only impossible but the hoops one had to travel through to attempt it would make Obama cry if he had any idea what the government run care was doing to his Vets.

Wait times is rationing, no matter how you look at it. You can find the link to the Fraser Institute on Canada's Wait times here at Dr Hal Dall's blog. I want to thank him for pointing it out. It is a fascinating look into the discrepancies in Canada's health care, in spite of the equality for all mantra of social solidarity. Here is an excerpt from the research.

Finally, the promise of the Canadian health care system is not being realized. On the contrary, a profusion of research reveals that cardiovascular surgery queues are routinely jumped by the famous and politically-connected, that suburban and rural residents confront barriers to access not encountered by their urban counterparts, and that low-income Canadians have less access to specialists, particularly cardiovascular ones, are less likely to utilize diagnostic imaging, and have lower cardiovascular and cancer survival rates than their higher-income neighbours. This grim portrait is the legacy of a medical system offering low expectations cloaked in lofty rhetoric. Indeed, under the current regime—first-dollar coverage with use limited by waiting, and crucial medical resources priced and allocated by governments— prospects for improvement are dim. Only substantial reform of that regime is likely to alleviate the medical system’s most curable disease—waiting times that are consistently and significantly longer than physicians feel is clinically reasonable.

My Favorite Patient

________________________________ 1 Outbursts

Simply amazing.

Only In America Would A Patient Request A Bone Marrow Biopsy

________________________________ 2 Outbursts

I recently wrote how it's OK to do nothing when asked to evaluate a patient as a subspecialist. An oncologist responded with this unbelievable comment.

I am an oncologist. Recently, I had a patient sent to me for a mild lab abnormality. Two years ago, she had been seen by another oncologist, and told that it was a benign process. Now, with two additional years worth of labs showing absolutely no change, I concurred with the initial evaluation and told her no additional testing was needed. The patient told me "my PCP told me that he will feel better, I will feel better, and you will feel better if you do a bone marrow biopsy to make certain." I don't feel better doing better marrow biopsies....especially when they are for very weak indications. It is that unveiled threat of failure to diagnosis that drives so much inappropriate testing. I discussed the case with the PCP. We agreed that a bone marrow biopsy was not indicated (and he had never made the above statement to the patient). Unfortunately, in our now-is-when-I-want-it-done society, watchful waiting doesn't go over well (plus or minus that "irrational fear" of legal liability).

I can't think of any rational reason why a patient would want to subject themselves to a bone marrow biopsy after two oncologists suggested, in their expert medical opinion, that one was unnecessary. This procedure is not without pain. In fact, it can carry a significant amount of discomfort. It is not cheap. It carries with it highly specialized pathological processing and interpretation. Why would a patient subject themselves to such an ordeal? May I suggest that they wouldn't, if they had to pay for it, even a portion of it. FREE=MORE

I might add that from a legal standpoint, physicians establish the standard of care. If everyone with a mild abnormality gets a bone marrow biopsy because physicians say they should then not doing one would establish a practice outside the standard of care. However, I have a problem with using standard of care as the basis for making determinations of negligence.

Just because it is common practice to do bone marrow biopsies on everyone with an abnormal lab, does not make it appropriate care. Take for example McAllen, Texas, a place that appears to have a culture of excess when it comes to testing and intervention. Is that standard the right standard? Would not doing a bone marrow on everyone with a lab abnormality open one up to negligence because everyone else is doing them? It does, but it shouldn't.

If the standard of care in a community is just wrong, how can one defend oneself against allegations of negligence when they went against the grain of what other physicians in the community would do?

I don't have a good answer for that. Guidelines have been heavily infiltrated by specialty societies. Many aspects of guidelines carry suspect recommendations based on suspect financial motivations. So much of medicine is based on medical judgment. There simply aren't guidelines. Many guidelines are based on a nice pretty package of healthy white men between the ages of 19 and 65. Many guidelines cannot be extrapolated across diverse populations. Many guidelines differ widely between different specialty societies and other nonprofit organizations.

So where does that leave the physician? They are stuck. Damned if you do and damned if you don't. If every doc in town is doing bone marrows on patients with slight abnormalities, you can be assured a lawyer will come knocking on your door if you don't do one on a patient you don't think needs one AND a delayed diagnosis is ultimately made.

By falling into that trap, you doctor are establishing an irrational standard that can never be achieved. A standard that is bankrupting our country out of a fear of preventing a bad outcome. When in fact, by doing more, we are actually causing more harm than good. Every study you find shows poorer outcomes in areas with a higher percentage of subspecialists and lower percentage of primary medical doctors.

It's time physicians take back their profession and establish standards based on sound scientific principles, personalized for every patient based on their extensive medical training, and stop making medical decisions based on a fear of deviating from irrational standards of care which they themselves create. The only folks getting rich off the brilliant legal scam known as standard of care are the lawyers filing claims and the unscrupulous doctors doing highly lucrative procedures (as determined by RVU/RUC) under the guise of standard of care. While patients are getting harmed and the Medicare National Bank is going bankrupt.

Would You Work a Month For Free?

________________________________ 1 Outbursts

British Airlines asked it's employees to do just that.


In an e-mail to all its staff, the airline offered workers between one and four weeks of unpaid leave -- but with the option to work during this period. British Airways employs just more than 40,000 people in the United Kingdom.


How is working for free any different than being unemployed?  Either way, you aren't getting a paycheck. Perhaps one could rationalize keeping their job.  But there is no guarantee that that would happen any way.  

In health care, depending on your payer source, many docs see 10%, 20%, 30% or more of their patients for free.  It certainly isn't 100%, but with declining payment and increasing costs, some physicians find themselves heading right into bankruptcy.  It's not unusual to find your practice go up in smoke if the business model finds its way into a heavy Medicare and Medicaid population.  Some physicians I have spoken with are forced, by their business managers to cap the number of Medicare and Medicaid patients after their quota is met.   It's the only way to survive in the socialistic payment model and capitalistic expense structure that has become American medicine.  Your office is a business first.  If you aren't open for business, you aren't practicing medicine.

Working for free is nice, when you do it on your terms.  It's called volunteer work.  Being forced to work for free is called slavery.
 

Why Can You Stick A Cotton Swab In Your Nose But Shouldn't Stick It In Your Ear?

________________________________ 10 Outbursts

Another pressing question for the day:


My question is a two-part question. 

Part A: Why is it wrong to stick a cotton swab in your ear but perfectly OK to stick one up your nose?
Part B: Do doctors ever use cotton swabs to clean their own ears? If not, how do you get the water and stuff out of your ears after a shower?

You shouldn't stick things in your ears because you can injure your tympanic membrane.   With that said, I personally have never seen it and have no idea how common that is.  As for the cotton swab up the nose, I can't say I've ever heard of anyone doing this.  But I can't think of any injury that may occur.  There aren't any membranes in your nostrils that a cotton swab could damage (that I know of)  

With that said, I do use cotton swabs to clean my own ears.  I guess you could call me non compliant.  But I can't say I ever have a problem with water in my ears.  Perhaps my ear hairs have formed a nice barrier.   Mrs Happy keeps them nicely trimmed.

Should You Change Your Own Blood Pressure Medicine Dosing?

________________________________ 12 Outbursts

A reader wants to know

I am on blood pressure medicine for HBP. In the last few days my blood pressure has been pretty low. I probably could fix this by reducing or eliminating the medication. I don't want to bother my doctor, but I'm reluctant to substitute my judgment for his on this matter. The problem is, I don't know what all he has in mind in prescribing the medication. If I call his nurse for advice she will want me to come in.

He's already reduced the medication once before. At that time he did not give me instructions to reduce it on my own, so I'm thinking he might expect me to call him. The last time I had this problem, the nurse suggested he was going to change medications, but he didn't, he reduced the dose instead.

Is this something I should just be managing myself, or does my doctor need to make the decision every time? I don't mind going in, but I don't want to bother him, either, with trivial problems. 

I think I may have answered my own question. If the nurse can't anticipate what he's going to do, how can I be expected to know what to do?

I would still appreciate any insight you have into how doctors think, especially on blood pressure maintenance.


Low blood pressure is not a trivial problem.  If you have other medical problems it can cause angina.  It can cause stroke.  Perhaps kidney failure.  Syncope.  Trauma.  Electrolyte disturbances.  Arrhythmias.  Kidney stones.  Blood pressure management has many fine nuances that should be considered when adjusting or changing medications.  These include age, medical conditions, lifestyle, genetics, race, weight, side effects, interactions.

I actually believe an individual should have the right to purchase all their own medications and manage them as they see fit and seek medical opinions on their own terms.  We are free to consume toxic waste on a daily basis and smoke till our hearts desire, but we can't order our own thyroid medication (unless you have the luxury of being a physician).

So, if it was me, I would seek the opinion of a physician before changing a blood pressure medication due to the complexities in the decision making that never make it past the conscious thought process of the physician.    Thought processes that are complicated on many different levels.  Thought processes that you will never hear your physician discuss.  It looks easy on the surface but I can assure you,  much goes into the thought processes of medical decision making, decision making that will never be documented anywhere. 

Wednesday, June 24, 2009

Doing Nothing Is Still An Option

________________________________ 2 Outbursts

Over at KevinMd a post suggested that outpatient primary medical doctors should have their fees raised by reducing the fees of subspecialist. Under current RVU/RUC rules the physician payment system is a WIN/LOSE system. For every winner there is a loser.


A responder to Dr Kevin's post, a specialist, left this comment:

There also seems to be a feeling that all of these procedures we do are unnecessary and unindicated. As a specialist, the vast majority of patients I see are referred to me by primary care physicians because they feel their patients need additional care. Why would they send me patients if they felt that further treatment was not indicated?

Years ago, I had a patient I was consulted on for a deep venous thrombosis from a subspecialist. For whatever reason, the hematology service was consulted as well. I ran into the hematologist reviewing the chart. I explained that patient probably got their VTE from a surgery they had several weeks prior. I asked them if they were going to order the horridly expensive profile of coagulopathy tests. And you know what they said to me?

"I usually would not, but since I was consulted I probably would".

After discussing the case we decided not to order all the tests that cost thousands of dollars to run. I bring this up in relation to the above comment because of the above specialist's comment.

Just because you consult as a specialist, doesn't mean you HAVE to do something. As a hospitalist, a lot of what I do is watchful waiting. I don't do anything and the patient gets better. Just because a primary MD sends a patient to you as an orthopaedist doesn't mean you have to do anything. If the question is what to do, doing nothing is certainly an option.

I think this is an important difference between primary trained MDs and subspecialty trained MDs. Being a subspecialist does not relinquish your right for watchful waiting. But I find many times that concept is alien. Perhaps it's the thought that not doing anything will not please the primary. Perhaps not doing anything means a loss of procedural revenue. Perhaps not doing anything leaves open an irrational fear of legal liability.

Whatever the reason, I take offense to the subspecialist who suggests that primary MDs refer patients because something has to be done. Sometimes, it just doesn't. Really. Doing nothing is still an option

How Many Blogs A Day Do You Follow?

________________________________ 6 Outbursts

With vacation, summer weather, busy work, and Mrs Happy's unexplained desire to spend time with me I haven't been able to follow my favorites for almost a month. At some point I will tune in. With that said, I have 350 blogs in my cue. There is so much great stuff out there.

How many blogs do you follow?

Hats Off To Happy's Hospital Transcription Department

________________________________ 1 Outbursts

As many critics of hospitalist medicine know, for every hand off a voltage drop of information can occur. I personally make every effort I can to thoroughly review the chart when I come on to a new service for the week. I also try and leave detailed explanations about the status of my evaluations when I go off service.

But what about the discharge? Since Hospitalists generally don't follow their patients once they leave the hospital, there is a high probability of bad things happening between the time of discharge and the first appointment with the patient's outpatient internist or family medicine doctor. This no man's land can possibly lead to readmissions as neither patient nor hospitalist nor primary MD have any idea what's going on.

One way to reduce this voltage drop of information is to have systems in place that make sure the patient's primary MD gets the hospital discharge summary in a timely manner. So how do I define timely? My definition is 24 hours. I learned yesterday that 81.9% of hospitalist discharge summaries are transcribed in 0-12 hours. 14.8% are transcribed in 12-24 hours. That means almost 97% of all Happy's hospitalist discharge summaries are automatically sent to the patients primary MD (and any other subspecialist noted) in 24 hours or less.

Since we have a policy in our group of doing discharge summaries immediately upon discharge, patient information is received by the primary MD in almost all patients within 24 hours. I can't say the same for many subspecialty services where we are asked to readmit several weeks after their primary discharge, in which there is no discharge summary to be found.

Because I find many subspecialty groups do not dictate discharge summaries in a timely manner, I will dictate a letter to the primary MD on many patients I am consulted on. Why? Because I know that no discharge summary will be performed for a month or more. And I feel bad for the primary MD and patient for bouncing from doctor to doctor with no easily accessible written record (and especially no verbal communication either).

We live in a fragmented system of health care bouncing between hospitals and clinics with no easy way to hunt down information. I dictate these letters (which by the way are completely voluntary and uncompensated by anyone) out of a personally duty to limit the loss of information as patients bounce around in no man's land.

Happy's hospital group has also surveyed our referring primary MDs to learn how they like to be notified (phone call or not) upon discharge. We will call if they want. We won't if they don't. But they will always (97% of the time) get our discharge summary in 24 hours or less.

That's how you provide great quality care. And I can assure you, as bundled payments come our way, hospitals will intensify efforts to improve their in house processes to limit readmissions. Decreasing volatge drop is one such effort that will be taken. They will do this because they have to. Just like every hospital in this country hired chart police to scour physician documentation to maximize payment as determined by the Medicare National Bank.

So congrats Happy's Hospital transcription service on a job well done. You are an example of how things should be done.

Tuesday, June 23, 2009

Obama Is Still Smoking And the Hypocrisy Continues

________________________________ 18 Outbursts

Unfreaking believable.   The ultimate act of hypocrisy continues.   You can't talk about health care while blowing smoke rings.   You might as well be blowing smoke out of your ass.   You have no credibility as a health care advocate when you mock healthy lifestyles.


Obama noted he is not a daily smoker and "doesn't do it in front of" his children

Like a tell all my smokers who say they've "cut back".  There is no such thing as being kind of pregnant.  You are a smoker or you aren't.  

Major Announcement From Pfizer

________________________________ 1 Outbursts

Pfizer Corp. announced today that Viagra will soon be available in liquid form, and will be marketed by Pepsi Cola as a power beverage suitable for use as a mixer.  It will now be possible for a man to literally pour himself a stiff one.  Obviously we can no longer call this a soft drink, and it gives new meaning to the names of 'cocktails', 'highballs' and just a good old-fashioned 'stiff drink'.  Pepsi will market the new concoction by the name of: MOUNT & DO.

 

Thought for the day: There is more money being spent on breast implants and Viagra today than on Alzheimer's research.  This means that by 2040, there should be a large elderly population with perky boobs and huge erections and absolutely no recollection of what to do with them.


Thanks to my grandma Fern for alerting me to this breaking news.

How Much Does A Hip Replacement Cost For A Dog?

________________________________ 5 Outbursts

You would be surprised. Dr Khuly at the blog Dolittler explains.


Hip replacements (in which the entire joint is replaced with artificial components made specifically for pets) go from $3,500 a hip (the very lowest I’ve ever heard) to about twice that. And because so many sufferers are bilaterally affected, a two-sided hip replacements is usually better than its unilateral version. Yes, that’s $7,000 to about $14,000.

Compared to the human version, however, this highly specialized procedure (almost always performed by a team of board-certified veterinary surgeons who are additionally schooled and certified in this approach) goes for less than a tenth of its human equivalent (and they are equivalent in most every way).

Now I ask you Obama and company. How is it that equivalent procedures in almost every way costs 1/10 for a dog than it does for a human? Would we intentionally implant infected hardware in our little Marty? Would we intentionally operate in unsterilized suites on baby Cooper? Would we intentionally provide bad veterinary care to all our best friends?

Of course not.

So how can we offer bilateral hip replacement for 1/10 the cost? I can answer that. 10% of the cost is good medical care. The other 90% is drowning in a regulatory frame work that adds nothing of value to patient care. The only folks getting rich off of government care are the lawyers and public officials who guarantee themselves job security with every new hurdle introduced. As we drown in a sea of regulatory hurdles, we have out priced just about every family's ability to afford health care. We should be looking to different models of care that allow for good quality care at an affordable price. Imagine how many lives could be saved if American health care cost 1/10. Imagine how much more competitive America would be if our country wasn't' trillions in debt in unfunded Medicare entitlements. Imagine how much more competitive America would be if companies weren't straddled with $10,000 a year premiums.

America. You should be ashamed of yourself. The problem isn't bad health care. It's bad government. Only when you get the lawyers out of the equation will you get top quality care for 1/10 the price.

Addendum: My Egyptian Uncle had an uncomplicated heart bypass surgery in an Egyptian hospital by highly competent Egyptian doctors last year. Total cost for everything? $9,000. The issue is the cost structure underlying the delivery of medicine. It is not bad quality or bad medicine. It is bad government.

Why Did My Tomato Plant Die?

________________________________ 2 Outbursts

I'm wondering if all the other plants got together and sacrificed this little buddy to save themselves. Everything is doing great, except this one lone tomato plant. It's kind of sad in a way. I don't have any idea why.




click images to enlarge

I Guess I Was Meme'd

________________________________ 9 Outbursts

Looks like da Boss over at DB's Medical Rants Meme'd me last week. I guess I didn't get the memo on vacation. So here it is boss.

4 Movies you would watch over and over

  • Caddyshack
  • Vacation
  • Spies Like Us
  • Titanic
4 Places you have lived
  • Cairo, Egypt
  • Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
  • Gainesville, Florida
  • Rikers Island
4 TV shows you love to watch
  • Lost
  • Desperate Housewives
  • The Super Nanny (kick some ass nanny!)
  • A Baby Story
4 Places you have been on vacation
  • Hawaii (x3)
  • Cancun
  • Yellowstone (last week)
  • North Dakota
4 Of your favorite foods
  • Mrs Happy'sTaco night
  • Mrs Happy's Chicken Enchilada
  • Mrs Happy's anything
  • Sandwiches
4 Websites I visit daily
4 Places you would rather be right now
  • Running with Mrs Happy
  • Playing with my pup pups
  • Working
  • Planting tomatoes
4 Books I love
hmmmm....

I don't like tagging people so I won't. But anyone feel free to respond.

An Internist Offers Far More Than Primary Care

________________________________ 16 Outbursts

A reader over at A Nurse Practitioner's View responded to a post by author Stephan Ferrara, NP. A post which does not represent my views at all. In response to Stephan, a reader leaves the following comment.


Blogger Jane Know said...

Wow, how condescending is he?

Yet, I do agree with the Happy Hospitalist that a medical education is superior to nurse practitioner programs. I don't know who would dispute that.

But he's forgetting that most NPs have been in the real world practicing as nurses for several years, too. That real world experience counts for something that you can't learn in a medical textbook in school. Further, NP programs have pretty rigorous academic standards themselves, these days.

Anyway, once we are all out there practicing as MDs and NPs in primary care settings, we are on pretty even playing fields. I know incompetent doctors and superior NPs. That is not a generalization about either profession, just a statement that sometimes the best education is on-the-job, and also variable depending on the individual.

To me, it seems like the Happy Hospitalists may be focusing a bit too much on the status of MDs, and not as much on solving real world problems like primary care provider shortages and health care costs for people who can't afford doctors.

June 18, 2009 5:54 PM





I would have to respectfully disagree with most of these assertions.

  1. Being a nurse for 50 years will not prepare you to practice a full scope of medical practice. The nursing career and responsibilities are simply not the same. I could be a doctor for 50 years and have no ability to practice nursing independently, even though I am around nurses in their capacity all day long. The two career pathways are not interchangeable. Nursing education and nursing experience does not prepare one to meet the requirements to practice independently in the same scope as an MD. If that was the case, we should all abandon medical school in favor of nursing school and nursing experience.
  2. NP programs have rigorous standards. That's great to know. Now I ask you to put those standards up against any medical school and you will find that the two simply don't compare. It's not even close. In fact, if you knew how less rigorous your training was compared to any MD degree, you would be frightened at how under educated you would be to provide a full scope of care equivalent to your MD trained counterparts. Perhaps you feel MD training over qualifies one for the role you see yourself providing in the primary care world, independently. I might suggest you have a vastly inferior scope of practice in mind, or perhaps you don't understand what it means to practice independently. I can assure you with 100% certainty, that your rigorous training would not provide you with the skills to practice independently in the same scope as MD trained physicians. I'm sorry to break the news to you.
  3. I'm sorry to burst your bubble once again, but in the real world primary care setting, you are not on even playing fields. The reason you feel this way is because you simply don't understand what being a primary care physician means. And you believe, foolishly, that your NP training provides with the skills to practice independently on par with the MD trained. I'm here to tell you, categorically, you may be able to practice primary care, as defined by you, but you cannot practice in the the same depth of scope as an MD trained internist. As an internist, I am trained to take care of many organ specific conditions independently. I do not call myself a cardiologist or a pulmonologist or a nephrologist because I am not trained to practice a full scope of those specialties independently. As such, you can provide primary care as defined by you, but your ability to provide an equal scope of services is limited as well. Your view of primary care is simply myopic. You will only understand what you experience. And your experience as an NP will be vastly inferior than an MD trained internist. That's not insulting. It's reality. You just aren't trained to do what I do.
  4. Sometimes the best education is on the job. I am going to have to disagree with on that as well. I certainly would not want you practicing on me as a full scope independent practicing NP when I come to you expecting you to be an expert in your field. As a resident, I had multiple levels of supervision. There were always experts looking over my shoulder, correcting my mistakes and guiding me towards the right answers. I would never subject myself to caring for someone while learning "on the job." If you want to learn on the job, you should go to medical school and get a residency and have a team of experts watch your back.
  5. Substituting a NP for an internist because there are too few internists is like substituting an eagle scout for a para military special forces agent because all the agents have quit or retired. NP and MD training are not interchangeable. An eagle scout can do a lot, but most can't kill with their bare hands. In the same regards, NPs may be able to do a lot of what MDs do (including specialists), but they also can't do a lot of what most MDs do. I don't understand where in the course of training, folks decided that NPs could practice independently in primary care but not subspecialty care. There is nothing special about being a subspecialist, except the extra several years of training. I would suggest that NPs take a 500 hour clinical experience, do ten heart caths, ten TEEs and become certified as independently praciticing cardiology NPs. The suggestion that these NP cardiologists were "on even playing field" with their MD cardiologists would be laughed out of town by just about every health care entity in this country. I view with hilarity the same assertion that NPs and internists are on even playing fields. The several years that differentiates my practice of cardiology from a cardiologists practice of cardiology is the how I think about NP vs internist training. In fact the difference is much greater do to the lack of medical school level education. I would never claim to be a fully independent practicing cardiologist because I am not qualified to do so. As such, the insinuation that an NP can practice outpatient internal medicine independently is absurd. And any NP who believes they are "on even playing fields" is ignorant of their own ignorance. You are the type of practicing provider I fear the most. Just as I would fear myself if I claimed to be an independently practicing cardiologist. This is reality. Your scope is simply not anywhere near the depth of scope a physician is capable of. You can define your scope as you wish. But understand, your lack of training does not provide you with the same capabilities as an internist. But your claims of being "on equal playing fields" is intellectually dishonest. You have medical skills. You also have nursing skills. You don't have internal medicine skills. Sorry to be the one to tell you. And internal medicine skills are required to practice a full range of outpatient primary care.
  6. I have no illusions about the "status" of MDs as you call them. I find myself no more special than the cable guy. I am trained to do what I do because I invested the time and energy, determination, hard work, sacrifice and delayed gratification to excel in the practice of internal medicine.. I would expect nothing less from my physician caring for me in my time of need. You believe I think physicians are better. I don't. I think they are much better trained. As they are. By exponential amounts on the basis of their education and experience as medical students, residents and practicing doctors. That doesn't make me better than you. It makes me more educated than you. And that makes my scope vastly superior to practice internal medicine than those who haven't experience the rigorous training. I respect everyone for their contributions to this world we live in. But to believe you are on an "even playing field" is a clear indication of your lack of insight into what primary care is and what you believe it should be. I ask you go read Dr Centor's blog as indicated below.
Dr Centor over at DB's Medical Rants does a great job summarizing what I believe to be the semantics of this discussion. Primary care is misunderstood. It's misunderstood because those not trained to provide it don't understand what the scope entails. Many folks believe it means primary prevention. Dr Centor discusses below the difference between primary, secondary and tertiary prevention.

Yet, we know that high quality primary care does save money. I believe Verghese is making the classic mistake of defining prevention only as primary prevention. Those who study epidemiology and health services research understand that the real value occurs in secondary and tertiary prevention.

Time for some prevention definitions:

  1. Primary prevention avoids the development of a disease. Most population-based health promotion activities are primary preventive measures.
  2. Secondary prevention activities are aimed at early disease detection, thereby increasing opportunities for interventions to prevent progression of the disease and emergence of symptoms.
  3. Tertiary prevention reduces the negative impact of an already established disease by restoring function and reducing disease-related complications


As most medical students, residents and fellows can attest too, the vast majority of our training is spent managing complications of disease, not the disease itself. It is impossible to appreciate how to manage a disease, without seeing the thousands of permutations of complications that present themselves. It is difficult, to nearly impossible, to be an excellent provider of medical care if you don't know how to manage the complications. It is difficult to understand how to proceed with secondary and tertiary management of disease without first becoming an expert on the complications of those disease.

This is where the magic of residency and fellowship happens. As physicians, we are experts in complication management. Primary care is not primary prevention. Primary care is primary + secondary+tertiary prevention. And it is complication managment when those efforts fail. It is with MD level training that one begins to appreciate the subtle nuances required to understand the physiology and pathophysiology in patients with chronic medical disease. How multiple medications interact. Their side effect profiles. Their complications and exacerbations. This is not primary prevention. This is primary care. This is internal medicine. It is a rigorous process where we learn to differentiate patients from guidelines and make medical judgements on an individualized basis. You can't learn a full scope of this in NP school. You can't learn this after 50 years of nursing. You learn it by studying the full skill set necessary to achieve that end.

So Jane and Stephan, I respect you. I respect you for your skills. I respect you for your education and desire to advance your patient management skills. You have me all wrong if you believe I believe you have no value in patient care. You do. And you have an important role in patient care. But you can't do what I do, no matter how many years of on the job training you experience. I will not back down on my assertion that independently practicing NPs should be held to the same standards as all other independently practicing MDs. You may practice primary care, but you don't practice family medicine. And you don't practice internal medicine. You practice primary care, some vague unknown entity that you have defined by your own skill set.

Perhaps the fact that most of the public has no idea how to differentiate internists from family medicine MDs from NPs works in your favor. Perhaps you have gained legislative equality in many districts at the expense of educational equality. That's something that will eventually play itself out. I do know, based on my own training and experiences that should I ever find myself in a condition that requires the skills of an internist, an internist is where I am going. An internist who has far more to offer than primary care.

Monday, June 22, 2009

Did Your Pet Give You The MRSA?

________________________________ 4 Outbursts


The Lancet is reporting
fido may be your vector for MRSA. One more reason to sterilize your pets.

The World's Greatest Beer Mug

________________________________ 0 Outbursts

What Does The Drug Company Agreement Really Mean?

________________________________ 2 Outbursts

The drug makers have agreed to cover part of the costs of brand name drugs in the donut hole, that no man's land of Medicare Part D where patients must pay for their own drugs.

As reported:

Obama said that drug companies have pledged to spend $80 billion over the next decade to help reduce the cost of drugs for seniors and pay for a portion of Obama's health care legislation. The agreement with the pharmaceutical industry would help close a gap in prescription drug coverage under Medicare.
I see one problem with the assertion that drug companies will be "spending" $80 billion dollars to reduce the cost of drugs for seniors. Drug companies and by default, their board of directors have allegiance to their shareholders, not the the US government or the seniors of this country. I can assure you, this deal may look good on paper (for seniors) and it may benefit seniors a great deal (FREE=MORE) but it is also one step further to the promised land of the senior vote. And it will worsen access to drugs for everyone else. There is no free lunch in this world.

It may save seniors money, but it will not be revenue neutral. It will not save $80 billion dollars over 10 years or reduce overall costs of care. Somehow, someway, the costs will be shifted. It may mean higher drug costs for those privately insured or the uninsured. It may mean decreased access to compassion programs. It may mean higher costs to hospitals. Whatever the agreement means, it will not mean $80 billion dollars saved in the next decade.

Drug companies are not in the business of sacrificing their shareholders or bond holders for patriotic means. They are in the business of making money. And that means they have selfish interests to maximize their ROI for any agreement they make with the government.

The question isn't really how wonderful this is for seniors. The question is how will buying off seniors affect the rest of America. And I'm telling you here, right now, you will see higher costs for everyone not lucky enough to bath in a sea of FREE=MORE known as the Medicare National Bank.

Road Trip To Yellowstone: Getting There

________________________________ 8 Outbursts


Any objections?

Sunday, June 21, 2009

An Incredible Error of Arrogance In the AMA

________________________________ 7 Outbursts

This is a personal observation but one that I find incredibly elite and destructive to the free speech process of political discussion.  Over at KevinMD a series of original guest columns have made their way onto his excellent blog.  Here is the latest.  I have noticed, except for the first guest column, all subsequent columns have had their comments closed.  I know that this is not the personal policy of Dr Kevin.  He is always open to polite disagreement and praise.  At my blog I censor no one unless it is threatening or illegal.


I can only surmise that the AMA asked that Dr Kevin  close his comments on their guest posts.  This is the AMA.  The American Medical Association.  An extremely powerful lobby group in this country.  

And they don't have the guts to take a little criticism or even praise from readers who wish to leave their opinion on the commentary of folks who represent their position.

In my eyes, that is censorship at its worst.  That makes the AMA no better than the Iranian government.  A bunch of thugs spewing their propaganda without the option of  free speech rebuttal.

So I've decided, every time the AMA uses Dr Kevin as their propaganda machine and doesn't allow his readers to respond, you can respond here.  

I will respond first.  Dr Rohack, President of the AMA, says:  

President Obama recognized in his speech that medical liability reforms are needed to reduce rising health-care costs.

What Dr Rohack didn't say was that the Obamessiah is against any type of caps on med mal. You can't have liability reform without the threat of wiping out a physicians livelihood.  The physician will always error on the side of doing too much rather than too little.  Why was this important piece of information left out of this propaganda?  

If anyone else feels a desire to respond to the AMA here  go ahead.  Anytime I see an AMA post on Dr Kevin's site treating free speech like Iran treats free speech, you will get a chance to respond here.  

AMA, your actions despise me.  A position, I think, that carries an incredibly error of arrogance on your part.  


You Are Living In The Medicare Tomato

________________________________ 7 Outbursts

In case you missed it, The Medicare Tomato, a post I wrote last year.  
Happy Father's Day to all the fathers out there.

You want to know what the process is like for a physician to make a living as a physician?
Look only toward the Medicare Tomato.  Imagine for the moment that you have been taken out of reality and into the alternate bizarro world of the Medicare Tomato.  In this analogy, the Medicare Tomato represents a day in the life of a practicing physician.
You're getting verrryyyyyy sleeeeepppppeeeee.............



I love tomatoes. They are one of my favorite foods.  Buying tomatoes used to be easy. I would search the Sunday newspaper for the specials of the week. There are multiple grocery chains in my neck of the woods.  There are multiple types of tomatoes.

Roma
Hydroponic
On the vine
Organic
Slicing
Cherry
Grape


The variety and quality are endless.  Different stores offer different varieties. They try to differentiate themselves in quality and in price.

I have my pick of the tomato litter. I can go to any store I want.
I base my decision on price.
I base my decision on geographic location.
I base my decision on how the tomato looks and feels.
I base my decision on what I would use them for.
Life is great. I find a tomato I like for a price I consider reasonable.


The store is happy.  I am happy.  I take my tomatoes, and I pay cash for my product.  Sometimes I pay by credit card just to earn that extra 1% cash back.


One night I was awakened by a terrible thunder clap. A terrible storm had swept through over night. I didn't think much of it. But the consequences of that brewing storm soon became obvious.  That storm signified the end of the free market trading of cash for tomatoes, in which both customer and grocer were happy with the payment for services rendered.


Enter the massive government take over. A massive coup on the tomato market.  By a midnight Congressional mandate, the destruction of the free market exchange of money for tomatoes was replaced and regulated by the Medicare National Tomato Bank (MNTB).


Tomatoes, by nature of their nutritional content, have been deemed a right for all Americans. By Congressional mandate, all Americans (and illegals) were given a Right to tomatoes. No American should ever be allowed to live without their tomatoes.

Wow, I thought. That's great. I get free tomatoes for life. Life couldn't be better.  Born out thin air was an entire nation of entitled tomato eaters. (ETEs)  I was ecstatic. Somebody loves me, I remember thinking. However, that feeling of joy quickly faded. 


Immediately after removing free market principles from the tomato market, the MNTB instituted the principles of most resistance. If something can be regulated, it will be.  The word quickly spread through out this great nation of ours that the government would now make tomatoes a right for everyone.


The demand for tomatoes took off. Grocery stores everywhere were selling out. Nobody could keep tomatoes in stock. The grocery stores were ecstatic too. They simply sold their tomatoes and sent the bill to Uncle Sam. Uncle Sam sent them a check for their price of tomatoes.  The grocers were happy. They sold out every day. The people were happy. They were getting free tomatoes. ETEs everywhere loved their Congress.


Unfortunately, the MNTB was not happy. They were fitting the bill. And that bill was exploding. That $200 billion dollar tomato bill was quickly rising. Faster and faster. 10% a year. Year after year. The MNTB soon realized that they could not afford to continue paying for free tomatoes for everyone.  In an effort to reign in the costs of the MNTB, Congress did something completely anti American.  They took capitalism out of the tomato market.

Cutting back on the benefits to the people was considered political suicide. How could these professional regulators, who promised tomatoes for ETEs everywhere; How could they ever back down. They could never ration the tomato consumption.  They would be kicked out of office for even suggesting such a thing.

In their brilliant strike of genius, they decided to try something that had never been tried before in the world of capitalism. They would reign in the cost to the MNTB, not by cutting the demand (political suicide), but by instead instituting a policy of 80% payment of market prices.

By now, the people are happy. Their free tomatoes are safe. There lives as ETEs live on.  The grocers? Not so happy.  They have just been taken to the cleaners. Their glorious tomato days have just ended. Instead of receiving just payment for a just product determined by market prices, a payment agreed upon between the customer and the producer, they have just been taken out of the loop.  To the tune of an 80% payment rate.


This policy had a profound effect on the grocer's mind set. No longer did they feel the desire to provide the best possible tomato at the best possible price. A price agreed upon between consumer and grocer.  No longer did they feel the desire to offer a better tomato to compete with their grocer down the street.  When the 20% cuts went into effect, the grocer's responded by offering fewer tomatoes for sale.  Gone were the hydroponic.  Gone were the organic.  The profit was leaving, and so were the choices of tomatoes available to the ETEs via the MNTB.

At 80%, they could still make a decent profit, so they sacrificed some margin for quality, in an attempt to keep market share.  But as the MNTB soon learned, these false price controls did nothing to reign in the cost to the National Tomato Bank.  Grocers responded by selling more technologically advanced super duper genetically modified purple tomatoes.   The MNTB would pay for them, and pay at a much higher rate, considered a more valuable product via the relative value unit system (RVU) of tomato price controls, which was now in place to differentiate the value of each tomato.

While the benefit of these tomatoes over the cheaper tomatoes was suspect, the MNTB paid for them anyway, as part of the overall MNTB rules and regulations passed by the lifetime regulators known as Congress.  What the MNTB soon realized was that the grocers were pushing far fewer of the cheap tomatoes and more of the expensive tomatoes.

Because they got paid more for selling expensive tomatoes.  The MNTB got exactly what it paid for.   In an effort to decrease costs, they actually got a high cost, low value tomato market, courtesy of the RVU system they signed off on.  The cost to the MNTB exploded.

The volume of specialty tomatoes grew exponentially. As the grocers realized they could not make a living on the cheap tomatoes, they moved toward selling the expensive ones with marginal additional value.  In response to the continued explosion of cost related to its cost controls, the MNTB did three things.

  •  They again dropped the payment rate to 50% of current cost for all services, including super duper purple genetic tomatoes.
  •  They set a sustainable growth rate where in the cost of all tomatoes to be paid by the MNTB would be set in stone, and determined by inflation and population growth
  •  They established a strict set of rules and regulations known as Evaluation and Management codes for the grocers to get paid by the MNTB.


The first response exacerbated the problem. Since the super duper technology tomatoes were paid at a higher rate, more and more grocers stopped offering cheap tomatoes. They simply removed the variety of product.  They removed their rings of service. One product fits all.

The cheap primary tomato market was killed off.

What remained was the expensive specialty tomatoes that continued to maintain a high value of importance, relative to the primary tomato market, to the MNTB.  As the consumption of specialty tomatoes grew exponentially, the death of the primary tomato market simultaneously led to massive cost increases in the total cost of the MNTB program.  The volume continued to explode, without so much as a brake on the demand.  Because folks, tomatoes are a right, as decreed by the professional regulators.

Now, to make sure the groceries weren't cheating the MNTB, the government instituted strict rules and regulations that had to be followed to get paid. Any deviation from those rules and the grocers risked fines of tens of thousands of dollars and jail time for defrauding the MNTB.  Long gone were the days of submitting a bill and getting paid based on market prices.

Now you had to submit incredibly complicated paper work  to get paid not what you were due, but what the MNTB says you were due, the rates set forth by the sustainable growth rate, as determined by the false economies of the MNTB.  For each and every sale made to an ETE, the grocer had to submit to the MNTB a letter detailing the encounter the grocer had with the ETE.

This shall be known as the "progress note"


A consumer came in today at 12:04 pm on March 7th, 2008. He did not complain of any tomato headache. He had no gas pains. He appeared to be in good spirits. He was not orange. His lips were drooling for a chance at free tomatoes. He appeared angered at the lack of options and declining quality. He was at one point found to be pointing and yelling profanities. He took 7.4 pounds of the super duper genetically altered tomatoes (verified by government scales) with a big fat giant grin on his face, yelling, "I ain't paying for it", all the way out the door.

By now, several years into the program, the grocers were tiring of the process. Every ETE that bought tomatoes, took the expensive ones. The cheap ones could no longer make a profit and the makers of the cheap tomatoes had all left the business. The payment rate of the cheap tomatoes had put all the cheap tomato growers out of business.

All that was left was the single brand of expensive tomatoes that the MNTB still considered beneficial to the public at large. It turns out that the lobby group for the special genetic laboratory that earned a profit in royalty for every genetic tomato sold; It turns out that they contributed $250,000 last year to the Congressmen who sponsored the MNTB program.

In a few short years, what was once a thriving market of choice and quality in the tomato market was dwindled down to a single choice of expensive, but marginally beneficial tomatoes, whose sole ability to prosper was based on the corrupt contributions of a few corporate talking heads in high places.

All the while the cost of selling tomatoes continued to rise for the grocers. They had to hire spies that followed the ETEs around the store so they could document the required paper work necessary to receive payment.  When nonenglish speaking ETE came into the store, the MNTB rules forced the grocer to hire bilingual spies to communicate their actions for the progress note.  The grocers were required to post warnings at every tomato point of sale about the 234 known illness that could be contracted from the handling or consuming of raw tomatoes.  The grocers were required to carry  expensive insurance as mandated by the MNTB to cover any lawsuits that may be attributed to the consumption of raw tomatoes. The grocers were mandated by law to make sure that ETEs, who missed their appointment to buy their tomatoes were contacted on at least 16 different attempts to make sure they were aware of the consequences of not consuming their tomatoes and the consequences of not complying with the healthy tomato initiative as set forth by the MNTB.  The burden of life was fully placed on the grocers and personal responsibility and common sense was completely removed from the ETEs.


The grocers had to hire additional accountants to run the paper work. They had to buy additional equipment to track the tomato statistics. 10% to the bottom line for the billing and collections department.  The overhead of the grocer sky rocketed. While the payment rate from the MNTB plummeted.  The grocer was caught in a swirl of capitalistic cost structure with a socialistic payment model. It was not sustainable.

As the spies brought the paperwork to the cashier to finish the final note of documentation for the evaluation and management of an ETE, the lines backed up. The ETEs would wait for hours to get out of the grocery store and home with their specialty tomatoes.  As the costs to the MNTB continued to explode, the government thought of more creative ways to try and keep the entitled tomato market alive.  It put the burden of tomato quality on the shoulders of the grocers. Once again, another cost to burden and another way to reduce payment. It created quality incentives which, were at first optional, but eventually would carry a negative payment structure.  Do it or lose more money.

The state of the entitled tomato market was in shambles.

A low quality, low choice, over burdened, over regulated, over expensive cost structured had replaced a once thriving enterprise of choice and competition between grocers.  With time, one by one, the grocers left the tomato market.  Access to to free tomatoes by ETEs was dwindling. No longer could the ETEs walk to the grocer down the street.  They had to drive miles to see the government mandated access to tomato market. Known as the emergency tomato grocer (ETG), the MNTB created rules and regulations that forced this group of grocers to stay open at all costs. No matter what. And to accept the price paid by the MNTB.


The result was a massive influx of ETEs into these government mandated ETGs. The waits piled up.  Hours and hours of waiting a day. The entitled would come from miles around to get their free tomatoes.  They would come, even though they hand hundreds of pounds sitting in their brand new stainless steal top of the line fridge. They wanted more, and they would get it by any means possible.

Eventually, the ETGs closed as well, as the payment rates failed to fund the operating costs of the grocers. Even the mandated ETGs closed up shop.  Socialisitic prices in a capitalistic cost structure.  One day, even the super duper specialty tomato and its high payment rate couldn't keep the grocers and the ETGs from doing the inevitable.

They all quit selling tomatoes. All of them. The groceries moved on to selling canned goods and dairy, which carried a cash only high margin profit.  The ETGs closed down, causing the back up access for ETEs to collapse on its own weight.  The public, so used to getting free tomatoes as their right, was suddenly found scrambling for alternative sources of their free tomatoes.

But one by one, grocer after grocer, bogged down by incredible regulatory costs associated with receiving 20, 30, 40 cents on the dollar for their tomatoes...one by one, they all left the entitled tomato market.

No longer could you walk into any grocer, grab a bag of your favorite guaranteed tomato, while expecting someone else to pay for it.  The grocer decided to go back to the way it was before.  The tomato lover and himself.  He would start to sell tomatoes again, but he would only accept cash or credit.  He would provide a quality product at a reasonable price and let the people decide what price they wanted to pay.  He got rid of the forces of destruction and allowed his customers to tell him once again what it was that they wanted.

The Medicare Tomato is the reality of health care delivery today.  It is the backwards approach to the rationing of a service that is finite.  There is no question about it. Health care not an unlimited resource and the policies of rationing will always best be determined by the personal financial stake that everyone has in their health care.  It doesn't mean cash only or insurance only, or free care for all or universal access.  It is a rational approach to demand control, whether that be means tested or income dependent.  Whether that means balance billing or high deductable policies.  Whether that means shopping for service and quality through price transparency.  Whether that means strictly catastrophic insurance coverage.  Whether that means tort reform to reign in defensive medicine.  Whether that means judicious use of a gate keeper Medical Home model. What ever it means.

It does not mean price control.

You can't control costs by controlling price.  It will never ever ever ever ever ever ever happen.
Thanks for listening.  I think I'll go eat a salad.

Saturday, June 20, 2009

With Extra Cheese?

________________________________ 12 Outbursts


Cheesewheels: "A cheeseburger patty, battered; then deep fried. Served in Lander, Wyoming at the Dairy Land Drive In.


I stopped there on a road trip this week. Never got a chance to try it. The service was so bad, I ran across the street to the Taco Bell. There I was graced with the presence of the "manager". A young guy with a pony tail half way down his back. Sitting on his ass talking with friends while two other (nice) employees struggled to keep up with the rush of customers.

When I worked as a pizza delivery driver almost 20 years ago the manager was in the back busting his butt making pizzas with the rest of us.

Why are people so lazy today?


Friday, June 12, 2009

Is This The Future Of Hospitalist Medicine?

________________________________ 19 Outbursts

The Refugee posts his concerns over at Hospitalist With A View.  It's an excellent read on how the economics of medicine drive the medicine itself.  You get what you pay for.  If you value pay well for  high cost procedural/surgical medicine, you will get systems in place to deliver high cost procedural/surgical  medicine with excellent efficiency.  If you paid cognitive medicine well, you would get systems in place to deliver highly efficient cognitive medicine with excellent efficiency.    Here's a clip below.  Go read the rest.


But that wasn't enough. Now the proceduralist/technicians want to maximize the number of procedures (which are supposed to include a global 90-day period of post-op care) without having to deal with all that pesky time-consuming post-op management. Hospitals that make money off the backs of these guys salivate at the notion of boosting their procedure output. What's the new en vogue way to achieve this? By turning over all of that post-op care to the hospitalist. We are being shamelessly used to construct the assembly line that plucks the money off the Medicare (and occasionally privately-insured) tree.

Does Obama Have Bitemporal Wasting?

________________________________ 1 Outbursts

A reader asks another question:



Look at Obama today. He has bitemporal wasting. I have not noticed it before. Have you? What do you think?


I figured it was from this.





Anyone else have any other plausable explanations for his bitemporal wasting?

Have Hospitalists Become The Dumping Ground?

________________________________ 10 Outbursts

A reader asks the question:


Has hospitalist co-management simply turned into outright, legitimized dumping?

I get called from the ER to admit a perforated viscous in a 80 year old woman with abdominal pain, and copious free air on CT.  General surgery was called, told the ER "admit to the hospitalist" and refused to even call our service to discuss it as he/she "not seen the patient yet" and told the ER when pressed when he/she would be in, it would be "some time tonight" rather than the 1 hour required by our medical staff bylaws.


This is how not to form good working relationships.  I swear, sometimes it seems like subspecialty groups consider hospitalists the enemy.  You try and do the right thing by having physician to physician communication and some doctors find themselves above the process.  Almost as if they are too good to be bothered with such annoyances as patient consults.  I have stopped counting how many times I have had a surgeon yell at me for "only consulting me on the uninsured patients" or "only consulting me on the complicated patients".  I have stopped counting how many times certain doctors yell at me for asking for their help in evaluating patients that I have no formal training.
   
For example, just recently I had a surgical problem where in I was forced to go through  four surgeons of varying subspecialties whom were all qualified to evaluate the surgical condition for which I was requesting assistance.  It took me 45 minutes to hunt down a doctor, who finally agreed to see the patient after their surgical and clinical rounds, the following day.  

When you don't have back up to evaluate and manage conditions for which you are not trained to handle, you simple stop accepting them to your primary service.  I would not put myself into a position as an attending where I would accept a dying patient and no subspecialist to help evaluate conditions for which I am not trained to manage.  It would be like me transferring the patient from Happy's regional referral center to a small town community hospital.   There is not a chance in Hell that I would ever agree to admit a patient with a primary condition for which I am not able to manage unless I was GUARANTEED immediate access to the subspecialist who can.

At Happy's Hospital, according to bylaws, the only time a physician is required to consult on a patient, is if that patient is asked to be seen in the ED.  If the doctor is asked to see the patient on an inpatient, they can refuse.  I have been burned too many times, mostly by surgeons, who flat out refuse to see patients, even if they are on ED call.  Mostly because they have in their minds that we hospitalists are out to get them  by only giving them sick, uninsured and complicated patients.

I have stopped playing these games and now ask that any surgical patient that needs to be admitted  either be diverted through our ED (which ads extra cost, and I hate diverting patients to the ED) or they get admitted directly to the surgeon (which is rare).  I have no problem admitting surgical patients when I know the surgeon is available immediately. When I see the  patient as a consultant or a primary, nothing is different for me.  

Unfortunately, at least in Happy's culture, there are too many surgeons who don't have the same sort of sense of obligation to consult on patients when requested.  They have all built their outpatient easy patient surgical suites which they bought into and reap the facility fee profits.  Their  reliance on hospital consults and referrals is gradually slipping away.  This is another reason why I see a quickening of the divergence of the medical and surgical physicians into hospital only (hospitalists) or outpatient only based practices.  

Since I have lost faith in many subspecialties (mostly surgeons) to offer me their opinion without roadblocks, I simply refuse to admit their patients without first having the ED consult in place.  That way I'm not spending 45 minutes (my record is two straight hours of phone calls battling with business managers and having a surgeon lie to my face) trying to get help for my patients.  You too should consider such a personal policy as well.

Thursday, June 11, 2009

I Got My Ass Handed To Me

________________________________ 50 Outbursts

13 admissions, one consult and one central line in a 12 hour shift.

7 : 99223 high level complexity admissions
4 : 99220 high level observation admissions
2 : 99291 critical care admissions
1 : 99233 ortho follow up consult
1 : 36556 central line

with 1/2 hour left to write this post.

If every one of those patients were Medicare, how much did I bill for the night? Let's see

7 (99223) About 5 Total RVUs worth about $170 each for a total of 35 RVUs/$1190
4 (99220) About 4 Total RVUs worth about $140 each for a total of 16 RVUs/$560
2 (99291) About 6 Total RVUs worth about $200 each for a total of 12 RVUs/$400
1 (99233) About 2.5 Total RVUs worth about $90
1 (36556) About 3.5 Total RVUs worth about $110

Remember, it's all relative. Tonight, a record night, I produced a total RVU (work RVU+practice expense+malpractice) of about 69 RVUs. If every one of those encounters was a Medicare patient, I would have collected close to $2,400.

If you look at just the work RVU's, that RVU amount that is attributed only to physician expertise, education and effort (strip out the practice expense and malpractice expense from the total RVUs) , the workRVUs amounts to about 52 RVUs for 14 complicated admissions/critical care/consults/ and a central line.

Lets compare this to the Medicare payment to the orthopaedic surgeon for doing the total knee arthroplasty (CPT 27447) that I was consulted on. It is worth about 23 work RVUs. Add in the 4 work RVUs for the consult before surgery and you're looking at 27 work RVUs to do a total knee arthroplasty. Now granted, this surgery carries with it a global 90 day period for which the surgeon is required to care for the patient as part of their agreement.

To produce 52 work RVUs an orthopaedic surgeon would have to perform just under two total knee arthroplasties (about 1.9). So lets assume they do that in the 11 hours. Let's say the consult takes 1/2 an hour ( that's pushing it). Two consults would take an hour. That leaves 10 hours of time for 1.9 surgeries and all post operative follow up.

It would take an orthopaedic surgeon a time commitment of 5 hours over a 90 day period for their total knee to produce the volume equivalent to the time and effort put in by a hospitalist on a record busy day.

Let's even assume that it takes 5 hours of OR/post OR cares to do a total knee (which is perhaps double or triple the actual time committment), if you are a medical student would you rather spend 11 hours admitting 14 people or would you rather spend 11 hours doing surgery on two of them.

The answer is simple. And that's why medical students know exactly what they are doing when they shun cognitive only medicine in favor of the lucrative procedural/surgical based subspecialties. When you can earn the same amount seeing two patients with a five hour commitment that in actuality may take less than 1/2 that much, deciding what medical career to pursue is not rocket science. And it's all courtesy of the RUC.

Before some subspecialists spam me as saying I knew what I was getting into, let me say I love my job. Hospitalist medicine has left the irrational constraints the RVU pot. This discussion is not personally about me, but rather about the reality of the model for which we choose to pay doctors to perform.

America, the RVU scam is directly responsible for the exacerbating debacle in McAllen, Texas, a pattern of deceit that is also present in every corner of this country . You should be very afraid of your health care. The RUC and its RVU scam has turned you into bars of gold.

Bars of gold that the medical students of today have gone searching for, by their shunning of the cognitive based specialty of internal medicine.


Addendum:  I forgot to add, the central line, from start to finish took me 20 minutes.  The observation admissions, which paid slightly more than the central line took at least 45 minutes.  It's not effort that is being paid.  The central lines are easy compared to admissions.  But they pay so much better on a time based axis.  And that has nothing to do with skill and everything to do with the RVU as determined by the RUC.  It takes far more skill for me to think my way through a differential diagnosis than it does for me to swab some cleanser on the skin and stick a needle in a vein. 

Wednesday, June 10, 2009

The Fed Would Be Shut Down If It Was Audited

________________________________ 1 Outbursts

"If the Fed examiners were set upon the Fed's own documents-unlabeled documents-to pass judgment on the Fed's capacity to survive the difficulties it faces in credit, it would shut this institution down," he said. "The Fed is undercapitalized in a way that Citicorp is undercapitalized."



How hypocritical for our government to forcibly seize private assets and demand a gutting of the executives in charge, while practicing unsustainable irresponsible policy at the same time. Hypocrites. All of them.  

When is America going to learn that governments that promise everything end up delivering on nothing.

Kudos To Mrs Happy

________________________________ 7 Outbursts

For running four miles for the first time in her life.  And she came in at just over a nine minute mile. Next goal?  Perhaps a 10K by fall.  Keep it up.  It wasn't long ago you were saying how you couldn't even go a mile.  The body has an amazing way of adapting to exercise. Every day it gets easier and easier.  Before you know it, you're running marathons.  


Perhaps instead of spending 1 trillion dollars (that Obama has promised to print) we don't have on worthless health care we can't afford, we should invest in exercise and reap the benefits that we know exist but are too entitled to put in the effort to work for.     What we need is a redirection of our efforts from insuring everyone into efforts to ensure health in everyone.   I laugh at the assertion that spending 1 trillion dollars now will somehow make health care cheaper for everyone in the future.    The thought is as hilarious as it is ludicrous. 

The benefits of exercise are undeniable.  From dramatically cutting the risk of many cancers, stroke and heart disease to improving productivity and reducing sick days.  It seems like we as a nation feel entitled to health care, but not health.    

Why do we feel entitled to health care but not health?   Do we feel no responsibility to the condition we find ourselves in?  I  understand that many conditions are genetic.  I also understand that many genetic conditions only show clinical relevance based on the lifestyle habits one chooses to follow.  Some folks do everything right and still get the short end of the health stick.  Some people do everything wrong and find themselves dying of old age.  

However, if you look at population statistics, both ends of the spectrum represent such a small minority that they simply don't matter.  If you fail to take care of yourself, you will, in all likelihood suffer the consequences.  

I'm here to tell you that we won't be able take care of you when those consequences come home to roost.  When the 1 trillion dollars turns into 2 trillion dollars turns into 3 trillion dollars.  When we find out that no matter how much money we spend, health care does not create health.  When we realize that we already spend twice as much as every other country for health care and spending more isn't' going to make us any healthier.  When we finally bankrupt this country after realizing we just did the mother of all oops.  

Only then will the people who get it.  Those that are taking care of themselves now.  Those sacrificing at the gym.  Watching what they eat.  Spending time moving instead of watching TV.  Those are the folks who will reap benefits of their sacrifice, when those all around them are being sent home on hospice in a government health care system that kept promising health, but in the end could only promise health care.  Until the day it couldn't even promise that.


Tuesday, June 9, 2009

The Consult That Wasn't, But Was

________________________________ 4 Outbursts

Every year that passes in this hospitalist medicine journey of mine, I learn to appreciate how dangerous being sick and hospitalized can be to your health.  Not a day goes by where I have to explain to a patient or their loved one that another day in the hospital is not necessary and may be harmful to their health.  Many folks don't realize  that the hospital is a dangerous place to live.  A hospital is not a hotel. A hospital is not a safe house to drop granny off so she doesn't interfere with the weekend fishing trip planned months ago.


I have laid witness to some pretty serious hospital errors in the last six years. I highly respect  the work of  Paul Levy, blogger AND hospital CEO, who's pursuit of transparency has brought new meaning to corporate responsibility as it relates to patient safety.  The culture of cooperation and openness in the pursuit of quality  is something I can only dream of working in.  It is not something that the government can mandate.  Running scared from JCAHO is not quality.  Quality is a culture from within.  It starts at the top and trickles down through all parties.   

I see a lot of animosity between groups of doctors, between nurses and doctors, between doctors and administration, between nurses and administration.  Last year I had the opportunity to give my opinions on a venous thromboembolism (VTE) prevention committee.  Just getting a VTE prophylaxis order set through committee, a simple and worthwhile pursuit,  was like pulling teeth. It was quite discouraging to see doctors acting like children.   Heaven forbid we try and prevent a patient from getting a blood clot.  How unjust we are to wish that upon our patients.

The politics and economics of medicine often takes center stage, sabotaging any possibility for all parties to work toward a unified goal.  And that's just too bad.  So my hat is off to you Mr Levy in your open pursuit of quality.

So, with that said, I have to tell you about a hospital error I recently encountered.  It's a first for me.   I call it the consult that wasn't, but was.  In order for a consult to be paid for by the Medicare National Bank (MNB), it must pass the test of the 3 R's.  
  1. Request.  There must be a request for the consult
  2. Rendering an Opinion.  The consultant must render an opinion to a question.
  3. Reply.  The consultant must document their reply.  This is usually a consult note in the medical record.
But what happens when a consultant sees your patient without a request?  This happened to me recently.  A patient of mine, whom I had managed for the better part of a week.  When I got a cold call from a subspecialist asking me if I had requested their opinion for consultation.  I was told by the subspecialist that they had already seen the patient, and performed a procedure on them.  And then realized that there wasn't an order for them to see.

How could this happen you ask?  Well, good question.  Like I said before, the hospital is a place where bad things can happen.  Hospital errors happen.   I've been doing this for six years and I've never had a consultant see a patient that I didn't request.  

There are errors all around us.  To Err is Human.  This major study a decade ago claimed almost 100K lives a year are lost to medical errors.  Some argue vehemently for and some against the accuracy of that data.  Me?  I'm not sure.  I do know that errors occur.  I do know that bad things happen.  I do know most of us try our best to do well for patients even though there are bad apples out there taking advantage of you as a patient.  These are the folks that  should be despised.   

It turns out, in this situation, the  consult intended for this doc was actually for a patient in another room, same room number, different wing. Somewhere along the transfer of information a transposition of data was made and the doc made their way to my patient instead of the correct patient.

Funny enough  the consult was actually appropriate for the representative subspecialty.  The procedure was appropriate for the medical condition and subspecialty in question.  I never requested the consultant because I didn't think it rose to the level of burden outside my scope of practice.  Other doctors would have, I guarantee you that.  But I was perfectly comfortable managing the disease burden of my patient.

So the question I have, if you were that subspecialist, how would you handle this?  I appreciated the phone call to let me know.  Even though one could argue the consult was reasonable,  it wasn't requested, and therefor it shouldn't  qualify to be billed.  Neither does the procedure.  

What would you ask of the hospitalist?  Anything?  Would you ask them to formally write a consult?  Would you apologize to the hospitalist?  To the patient or family?  If you are an administrator, would you be transparent and notify the patient and their family of the error?  Would you let it go because nothing bad happened?

What if the patient coded and died during the procedure?  Would you notify the family of the error?  If not, why not?  Mr Levy, if you ever stop by and read HH, I'm curious on how you would handle a situation such as this, in the interest of transparency and quality.  Or if anyone else wants to chime in, I'd love to hear your opinion on the matter.

Monday, June 8, 2009

What Do You Do When The Hospitalist Can't Get Along With The Outpatient Doc?

________________________________ 2 Outbursts

A Reader asks the question:

Do you have any advice for an outpatient colleague who is struggling with his hospitalist peers over how to draw boundaries between their (autonomous) management and the outpatient doctor's genuine desire to contribute towards the quality of care, especially regarding the discharge planning process? They're both frustrated with one another. Hospitalists feel outpatient doc is co-managing while outpatient doctor feels hospitalist won't listen to years of experience with the patient. How to broker a successful outcome?
There are several boundaries that need to be established here. If an outpatient doctor is going to turn over their hospital care to the inpatient doctor, they need to have an element of trust in the abilities of the inpatient doctors to provide appropriate care. Happy's hospital group does not do partial admissions of convenience. In other words, we do not admit over night and turn over care in the morning, because the outpatient doc needed their beauty sleep. If we admit a patient we take care of them until the end. That's not to say, sometimes, on rare occasion the outpatient doc will take over care after a 3 am admission. These are handled on a case by case basis.

I know that many outpatient docs do social rounds. They will swing by and talk with their patient. Sometimes they will leave a social note, sometimes not. But they never interfere with our management of the patient. They don't write orders . And they don't bill. (Now that's a dedicated doc!)

As for the discharge process, we always call the primary doc on discharge. We always dictate our discharge summaries immediately. We have processes in place that guarantee our DC summary gets to the outpatient doc within 24 hours. When I talk with the outpatient docs I always let them know briefly what happened, and what needs followed up with. I find often times, many docs don't care. They don't want to be bothered. They are busy trying to survive in their clinics. Some love the updates. Some hate them.

Everyone is different. We have tried to find out who likes what so we can notify those that like to be notified and leave those that don't alone.

I try and bow to the will of the outpatient doc if they have changes in the recommended discharge planning. They are the ones who will care for the patient on follow up. If they have a suggestion, I usually follow it. In the end you do what's right for the patient. If you guys can't come to a common ground (communication) with your referring outpatient docs, sometimes it's better that they see their own patients until an agreement is reached and boundaries can be established.

It's Time To Gut The Education Process

________________________________ 8 Outbursts

The RVU payment hierarchy is clear. There is a discrepancy between the payment for cognitive vs procedural and surgical services. Many subspecialists like to use the argument that their training is longer and therefor their payment should be higher.

And they are correct. They should get paid more for the longer training they experience. That's why I am proposing a change in their training that better reflects real world experience of what they have to offer me as a hospitalist (substitute internists or family medicine doc for hospitalist) or their patients.

I have yet to find a subspecialist that offers any great insight in the evaluation, diagnosis or treatment of medical conditions that exit their specialized organ of study. All medical subspecialists have always been internal medicine trained first. Whether the chosen field of expertise is cardiology, gastroenterology, allergy, infectious disease or nephrology, all of them have first completed residency in internal medicine.

The further pursuit of specialization can take anywhere from two to four additional years of training in a fellowship designed to make specialists experts in their organ of choice.

It is this specialization that has made internists turned subspecialists into subspecialists who have lost their ability to be internists. Is it possible that some medical based subspecialists can practice internal medicine? Yes, but I would guess the vast majority cannot nor would they have any desire to. They cannot because they are too far removed from the daily practice of subspecialty things to do what internists do. They don't want to because internal medicine is very complicated and involves little economic reward.

So I am here to suggest that we stop farting around by wasting everyone's time and money. Stop waisting billions of dollars of tax payer money every year. Stop wasting years of young doctors' time. I think it's time that subspecialists stop becoming internists first and go directly to their subspecialty training track, right out of medical school.

Instead of taking six years to become a gastroenterologist, (three years of internal medicine and three years of gastro) it would take just three. Cardiology? Three years. Why? Because we are all fooling ourselves if we believe that three extra years of internal medicine training adds any benefit for the vast majority of clinical patients who need specialized care. If you need a doctor to put it all together, you go to an internist. They are the ones that connect the dots. If you need a question answered about the heart, you ask for the opinion of a cardiologist. But the three years it takes for a cardiologist to learn how to manage diverticulitis is three years of wasted time and money that we just can't afford anymore.

One of my biggest pet peeves as a hospitalist is when I come to the chart the next day and find that one medical subspecialist has written a consult for another medical subspecialist. That fact that subspecialists believe only other subspecialists are capable of handling organ specific disease says to me that their understanding of the specialty of generalist medicine is gone. They have lost touch with reality. They can't understand how an internist would be capable of handling things they can't.

The same goes with the surgical subspecialties. There is no reason to train an orthopod to take out a gallbladder. If you're going to be an orthopod specializing in the hand, your entire existence should be learning about the hand. You are worthless to the general public, spending tax payer money in residency learning to replace hips if all you're going to do is carpal tunnel surgery.

I would like to believe that having a broad base of education for all physicians is helpful for patient care. But my experience with subspecialists says to me it just doesn't matter. Let's stop beating around the bush. All that extra education of generalist training that subspecialty medical and surgical subspecialists experience is a waste of everyone's time and money. Let's train them quicker. Get them out quicker. That way their argument for higher pay because of longer education disappears. Since they offer little in the way of anything outside their three year subspecialty training, we can pay them with reasonable parity.

And they can stop complaining that they deserve such a high premium for all their extended education. An education which comes at a great expense in direct tax payer training dollars and the preceived entitlement of higher reimbursement in clinical practice. A generalist education who's benefit disappears almost immediately once the cocoon of academia disappears and the first paycheck arrives from the practice of community based private practice.

Clinical Pearl: Stroke

________________________________ 1 Outbursts

Cerebrovascular Accidents (CVA) are not accidents. They are strokes. It's time we referred to them as such.

Saturday, June 6, 2009

Lowest LDL Ever

________________________________ 8 Outbursts

This is the lowest LDL ever for my patients

20
Untreated.  Wow.  That's amazing

see my other records

A Fascinating Piece Of Journalism From Dr Atul Gawande: The City That Couldn't Stop Treating

________________________________ 12 Outbursts

Do you know where the most expensive health care in America is being practiced? Read on.


Yesterday at work I was speaking with a colleague about health care stuff when he told me a patient of his brought in an article for him to read. An article from a doctor by the name of Atul Gawande. "Have you heard of him?" he asked. "Yes, of course", I said. He told me about this article in the New Yorker called "The Cost Connundrum". A piece that needed to be read.
And wouldn't you know it, yesterday a reader of HH did my searching for me. Dr David, a frequent commenter on my blog had sent me the link. I figured it must be fate if two doctors recommended it, in the same day.

After returning from the horse races last night, barely missing a 200:1 $2 trifecta (I don't know a thing about horse racing), I sat down on my leather couch with a cigarette in hand (just kidding). I lit a nice romantic candle , put my iPhone in hand, placed my Italian greyhounds by my side and I clicked on Dr David's link. And I read with confirmation about what some physicians have become. A disgrace to their profession.

I was not shocked in the least by what I was reading. I too have witnessed many of the same experiences Dr Gawande describes. And I can assure it, it is not a local phenomenon. It happens nationwide in our fee for service delivery of health care. Do more, make more. That is the reality of which we currently live in. I watch as financial medicine is practiced every single day.


And I am certainly not immune. Every time I have to code an E&M visit, I have to review my criteria to determine what level of service to bill. I have to make sure certain things are documented appropriately to not be accused of fraud in my high complexity level three hospital follow ups or my high complexity admissions and consults. Encounters which meet medical muster for the level of service I bill, but must also have specific ridiculous documentation to support it. Not a day goes by where I'm not actively documenting to meet insurance criteria, criteria that has no effect on patient care.

In the end, Dr. Gawande comes to the conclusion that physicians are to blame for the out of control nature of our health care expenditures. The blame rests solely on our shoulders. Our pen is the most expensive technology in health care today. Without our pen, we have only our minds for which to doctor. And our minds are compensated less than your community college tradesmen often are.

And why is the pen so expensive? It's all about money. Follow the money and you follow the health care. This article is an exceptional piece of journalistic truth. This one paragraph sums it up nicely, and why I also think it contains the solution to the problem.


Dramatic improvements and savings will take at least a decade. But a choice must be made. Whom do we want in charge of managing the full complexity of medical care? We can turn to insurers (whether public or private), which have proved repeatedly that they can’t do it. Or we can turn to the local medical communities, which have proved that they can. But we have to choose someone—because, in much of the country. And the result is the most wasteful and the least sustainable health-care system in the world.


I have blogged constantly about my experiences as a hospitalist. About how I feel The Medicare National Bank (MNB) is being raped and pillaged on the backs of FREE=MORE. Everything can be made medically necessary, the only necessary standard required to open the vault of cash hidden within. In our current fee for service, FREE=MORE, third party system, Dr Gawande hits the nail on the head when he writes "no one is in charge". Nobody is accountable. Not patients. Not doctors. Not hospitals. Not governments. Not taxpayers. Nobody. Nobody is accountable for anything. We are where we are today out of a natural selfishness for economic prosperity for every party in the food chain. To expect a result different than we have today is to expect all parties to strive for poverty.

We have gotten exactly what we have paid for. A very expensive, technology driven medical machine that strives to maximize economic profit at the expense of quality affordable health care. We will never achieve quality in fee for service when the goal of every party is to achieve profit as its primary motivating factor. That's not to say profit in medicine is bad. Profit in medicine is actually very important. Profit drives innovation to reduce medical complications to streamline operating costs and compete with other institutions for the community dollar. But you can only get quality and cost control when the economic distibution pie is not infinity.


If you have no limits, you get no cost control. The issue isn't how much we are paying for health care. The issue is how much health care we are providing. Health care isn't expensive. Unnecessary health care is.


What we currently have is unchecked FREE=MORE at its worst. If you can't ration FREE=MORE you get the most expensive care in America. Care where patients are nothing more than bars of gold waiting to be used as a down payment for that new wine vineyard or that real estate investment trust.


I see it everyday when I am asked to write acute systolic heart failure instead of "CHF". To maximize the severity of illness adjusted payment that the MNB has promised. Instead of taking care of patients, I have become a documentation advisor and middle man between the insurance companies and the hospitals. I accept this role with complacency, as I too benefit from the value I bring to the table as a hospitalist.

It almost seems like my role in patient care, on a regular basis, is not to take care of patients, but rather to take care of hospitals. The economy of medicine often trumps the care and in the process we sacrifice the right care for the most expensive.

In the current FREE=MORE, where no one is in charge, health care simply happens. Checks get written. Money gets transferred. No questions get asked. And it's all dependent on the actions of the doctor's most expensive weapon, the pen.

I see this mentality every day. I see it in outpatient notes. I see it in inpatient notes. I see it in how patients are worked up. How things are ordered. I am never surprised at the lengths we go to as physicians in our evaluations. I can spot economic medicine over quality medicine by barely blinking an eye. Because I see it every day. The clowns at the MNB are off making balloon animals while the people pillage the largest and most unstable bank in the history of our country. As we teeter on the brink of financial collapse, the MNB sputters along, writing checks for everything, with barely a question being asked as to why.

I have blogged previously about my desire to see local control over federal monies. Every locality has different needs. Whether you are an Eskimo or an inner city gang banger or a sweet golf playing granny, the health care needs of local districts are vastly different. And they know best how to meet their needs.

With that said, I have been a strong proponent of devising bundled systems of care where physicians and or hospitals band together into contracts of care formed directly with the patient, excusing all third parties from their role in the matter. That means the government and third parties stay out. I blogged about just such an idea here.

A bundled system of care where everyone comes out a winner. Why? Because all the forces are aligned and physicians get paid to take care of patients, not take more care of patients. As a physician, if you want to be richer, you either earn your way there through market pricing (like everything else in this world) or you see more patients. But you should not get rich by putting patients through unnecessary testing for your own financial benefit. That despises me. Because I know someday I will be a patient as well. And the thought of me being exposed to unnecessary testing so others can buy a new Corvette makes we want to puke.

I can assure you with 100% certainty, based on my experience as a physician that if we were to do an experiment with 100 doctors in which the first year they each earned $500,000 in a fee for service model. Then tell them all the following year they would be guaranteed $500,000 to take care of the same number of patients, but their only payment would be $500,000 up front . It would not matter how much care they did to patients, they would still earn exactly the same amount as they did when they were collecting a fee for service.
Want to bet what happens? I'll tell you what would happen. Your patients would see far less action in the hospital, ASC, radiology suite, clinic and any other health care site you can imagine. And they would experience no drop off in quality. Why? Because the doctors would take care of patients for the right reasons.

It's time doctors started acting like doctors and do the right thing. You earned your right to take care of patients through education. It's time you showed some respect for your field and do the right thing. Or don't do anything at all.

So where's the most expensive city for health care in the country? Who would have thought that the least ethical doctors live in McAllen, Texas. You are a disgrace to your profession. And every doctor out there in this country who does stuff to patients because they can, I despise you too. And I know who you are. I can spot you a mile away. You see, I'm a doctor too. And I know very clearly how to differentiate what is being done from what needs to be done.
If I was in McAllen, I would question everything. Everything. I would probably get my care somewhere else. But becareful. There are doctors everywhere doing things to you that you need to question. How do you know when a physician has your best interests at heart? You don't. Unfortunately, that is the nature of our fee for service you currently live in. If we don't change that, we don't change medicine.
You really must click on the McAllen link above and read what the good doc has written. It is a fascinating look at reality. For those who don't see it everyday, you will understand why your health is in danger if something doesn't change. For those who see it everyday, there is no surprise at all.


Friday, June 5, 2009

The Pickled Liver

________________________________ 0 Outbursts

  • Chronic liver failure due to alcohol abuse: Sad
  • Yelling & cursing all night: Frustrating
  • Greeting your day shift nurse by stumbling naked down the hall: Priceless
I could never be a nurse. It's just too hard.

Friday Afternoon Humor

________________________________ 0 Outbursts

Heard in the halls

Patient: I take my medications religiously.

Doctor: Does that mean you only take them on Sundays?

The RVU Payment Hierarchy

________________________________ 2 Outbursts

Much has been written about the RVU payment scheme generated by the AMA and propagated down the economic food chain beginning the the grand daddy of destruction itself, the Medicare National Bank. Relative Value Units, as they are called, have been used to determine an economic value for every possible CPT intervention a physician can bill for. The basic pattern that presents itself in the RVU scam, generated by the back scratching committee of subspecialists in the RUC, is as follows:

  • Cognitive only evaluations (Evaluation and Management, aka E&M) pay the least on a time based axis
  • Difficult cognitive evaluations pay a tad more than easy ones on a time based axis
  • All procedures pay handsomely on a time based axis when compared with E&M codes
  • The easier the procedure, on a time based axis, the more it pays.
  • The harder the procedure, on a time based axis, the less it pays.
Because of the way the payment model is structured, we get the following hierarchy of payment in the road to medical riches, as I see it. It is this hierarchy of payment that has lead to the current distribution trend of trained physicians in this country. All you have to do is follow the money. I present to you The RVU Payment Hierarchy, from worst to best payment on a time based axis of care:

  • Inpatient, complex (non-hospitalist subsidized) E&M encounters.
  • Inpatient, easy (non-hospitalist subsidized) E&M encounters
  • Outpatient, complex patient E&M encounters
  • Outpatient, easy patient E&M encounters
  • Inpatient complex general surgical interventions (perfed belly middle of night)
  • Inpatient easy general surgical interventions (lap chole)
  • Inpatient medical based procedures, complex (AMI crashing/cath)
  • In patient medical based procedures, easy (echo/dopplers/"chest pain" cath/ endoscopy/lines/stable angio)
  • Inpatient subspecialty complex surgical interventions (tumor dissection with bulky mets on a 500# person)
  • Inpatient subspecialty easy surgical interventions (TKA)
  • Outpatient easy medical based procedures (you don't do complex procedures as an outpatient) (you name it)
  • Outpatient general surgical interventions (again, only easy patients ) (you name it)
  • Outpatient subspecialty surgery on easy patients (you name it)
  • Successful cash only practice of any kind
  • Outpatient cash only cosmetic interventions of any kind. Botox, boobs

And you wonder why no one wants to do outpatient internal medicine anymore. I don't blame them one bit. In the next post I will suggest why this needs to change and how to get there through WIN WIN

Thursday, June 4, 2009

Clean Up Your Stank Will Ya

________________________________ 11 Outbursts

If you're coming to the hospital to see your loved ones, the least you could do is.

  1. Be Sober
  2. Don't Stink
Walking into an elevator with seven family members that smell disgusting (usually a combination of stale and new cigarette smoke, alcohol and body odor) is reason enough to avoid the public elevators at all time.

Thank God for the service elevators. If you're coming to the hospital to see your family, at least be respectful enough to clean up, even a little.

What Happened To The Promise Of No New Taxes?

________________________________ 14 Outbursts

At first, Obama said he wouldn't tax health care premiums. He blasted McCain for even considering it. Fast forward to Obama's current reality.

President Obama, in a pivot from some of his harshest campaign rhetoric, told Democratic senators yesterday that he is willing to consider taxing employer-sponsored health benefits to help pay for a broad expansion of coverage.


Goodbye promises. The ol' bait and switch at its finest. Where's the outrage? Taxing health care benefits? I'd say that puts the promise of no knew taxes on 95% of the population strongly out of reach.

Thinking ahead. When the average family of four is spending $30000 a year on health care insurance just a few years ahead, while making $60,000 a year, will you now make them pay $5,000-$10,000 a year in taxes on their benefits? Taking $10,000 a year per family out of the economy, redirecting it through a bureaucratic pit and then letting them decide how to spend it on health care?

That sounds like a genius plan to me.

Where do I sign up?

Wednesday, June 3, 2009

And I Thought Bush Was The Problem?

________________________________ 5 Outbursts

In a new audio statement aired by the al Jazeera Arab news channel on Wednesday, al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden accused President Barack Obama and his administration of “panting new seeds of hatred and vengeance towards America” by supporting the military operations against militants in Pakistan. 

What happened?  Where's the Obama love?  I can't say I'm not shocked.  How naive the lemmings are.

So You Want Social Solidarity? Show Me

________________________________ 29 Outbursts


So says a patients discharge summary.
There are significant barriers to this  patient''s care.  This 27 year old male has has no money for medications,  no health insurance, no car and no stable living conditions.   Happy's Hospital will set up transportation home through a private assistance program. All medications are $4 at Walmart.




Of course, as you could have guessed, the patient smokes two packs per day.  And "will try" to quit.

So I ask you America, what are the responsibilities of the patient in this situation?  Why should anyone care if the patient can't afford their medications while actively smoking?   Should free care be offered through public assistance programs (Medicaid) without any responsibility from the patient to reduce their reliance on such program?(ie quit smoking)?  Should hospitals and physicians be forced to provide free care at the expense of patient entitleditis?
At what point does personal responsibility trump social solidarity?  FREE=MORE is taking takes us ever closer to a that North Korean Utopian society.     We are a selfish people. Where all men were created equally selfish. Try finding a politician who leads for the good of society and not their constituency and I will show you a Medicaid patient who quit smoking to help  pay for their own medications. 
Under social solidarity, all Medicaid smokers would voluntarily quit smoking to help pay for their own health care needs.  An act of sacrifice for the good of the nation.  Of course that would be to mean.  To harsh.  To invasive, to ask those that receive the sweat of others to show some sacrifice of their own.  Some doctors in Happy's town will waive or greatly reduce their fees for patients who show initiative towards self sacrifice and initiative.  The fact that we find it appalling as a nation to ask for sacrifice from those that benefit from the sacrifices of others is reason enough for me to consider any talk of universal care to be nothing more than an exercise in FREE=MORE, not for social solidarity, but rather for an expanding case of entitleditis.


In what way should a Medicaid recipient show their social solidarity to the benefits they receive?  I'm all ears.  For starters, they should all get free Chantix.



The ACP Sells Out and a PCP Responds

________________________________ 6 Outbursts

In order to get to yes, the ACP has sold out its  internist constituents in a hard leaning leftist pursuit of universal care, sacrificing the principles that separate internists from other less qualified providers of primary care. I discussed my views here. Over at the ACP Advocacy Blog, a reader, PCP, responded with a great rebuttle to an NP who feels empowered enough (I should say ignorant enough) to believe they carry the same capabilities in their training to practice internal medicine in its outpatient primary care form. It's a great comment filled with truth. I recommend you go over and check it out.

The part that rings so true, and what I have stated from the beginning, is that primary care is defined on an individual basis, and what is offered by a NP is vastly inferior in scope than what can be offered by an internist. This is no different than subspecialties who chose to limit their scope of specialty care. I have met many a cardiologist, gastroenterologist, general surgeon and subspecialty surgeon who says "That patient needs to go to the academic meccah." Doctors define their scope by their abilities, inspite of their training.

As PCP says in his/her response:

The resulting work being mostly care coordination for which an entitled ANP would feel him/herself adequate. That however does not define a General Internist role unless he/she chooses to limit themselves to that. If we are to truly recognize value in health care delivery, then part of that will be to restore General IM to its roots, and in this regard ANPs pale in comparison."

You see, my definition of primary care is not the same definition that NPs choose to use in their desire to feel adequate in the role of providing it independently. Which has been my position from the get go. Choosing to say that one practices primary care is limited by how one chooses to define it, which is determined by how capable one is to practice it, which is determined by ones training and education. Which in the case of the NP medical home model will be vastly inferior in scope and capability. Not because NPs are bad people. But because they aren't trained to practice internal medicine, which is at the heart of what good primary internal medicine care can offer: Comprehensive independent care in the form of physician directed rationing of resources based on their ability to provide a total care package.

Remember, before there were certifications in medical subspecialities there were only internists taking care of your ills. I am thankful everyday for my training in internal medicine. As I see outpatient medicine at the hands of qualified internists dying quickly, being replaced by a force of underqualified participants, who as PCP says, legislated instead of educated their way to patient care, I am glad I carry the knowledge base to guide myself and my family through the soon to come marginalization of outpatient medicine under Obamacare.

The Stimulus Plan Is Working

________________________________ 22 Outbursts

$500,000 for date night.  Paid for by me and you.


That's real change I tell ya.

June Is Bustin' Out Over At Grand Rounds

________________________________ 1 Outbursts

The HealthBlawg takes June with a storm with this weeks Grand Rounds.  I'm honored that a post of mine  was included,  as I didn't even submit one this week.  Thanks Dawg.

Obama Says Health Care Reform Is Good For The Economy

________________________________ 4 Outbursts

Wow.  What a  great thought leader of our time.  How did he get so smart?



Here’s how House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) saw things: “This report is nothing more than smoke and mirrors,” Boehner said, as quoted by Politico. “Everyone agrees that reducing the cost of health care would benefit our economy, but the administration hasn’t offered a credible plan to do so without raising taxes or rationing care.”


The reason the administration hasn't offered a credible plan without raising taxes or rationing care is because no such plan exists.  As a practicing physician, in the current fee for service model of care, I know the only way to reduce the cost of health care is to stop paying for it.  End of story.  Now, it's time you go tell all your constituents the truth.  

Why is this so hard to accept?

VTE Prevention Drug Rivaroxaban May Have To Wait

________________________________ 0 Outbursts

The oral anticoagulant that is waiting to revolutionize post orthopaedic  VTE (venous thromboembolism) prevention will have to wait.  Despite a 15-2  vote by an advisory panel to approve rivaroxaban (an oral Factor Xa inhibitor), the FDA is not yet ready to pass judgement.


It looks like the bone docs will still have a medically valid reason for us to follow their patients on a daily basis for months ahead.

Tuesday, June 2, 2009

Caption Contest: Elephants and Sex

________________________________ 21 Outbursts

How funny are you?

Did You Know Kobe Bryant, George Clooney, Matt Damon, Johnny Depp, Brad Pitt, Will Smith, and Denzel Washington Are All Overweight?

________________________________ 0 Outbursts

The numbers don't add up for this mathematician, who says it's time to abandon the BMI as a measurement for obesity.  Funny stuff.  Who knew anyone gave this stuff much thought?


Oh Craps

________________________________ 0 Outbursts

Remember the lady that rolled 154 times in a row earlier this year at the craps table?  Some folks decided to calculate the odds.


Shackleford updated his calculation and settled on an estimate of 1 in 5.3 billion,explained here. That’s equivalent to a 95.6% free-throw shooter hitting 500 straight. Shackleford estimates there are about 50 million craps shooters’ turns per year in the U.S., which would mean DeMauro’s feat had about a 1% chance of happening this year.
I'd place similar odds on the political will to reform America's entitlements responsibl for the bankrupting this country.

 

Full Steam Ahead Toward Mediocrity

________________________________ 0 Outbursts

Life as a bumper sticker.  The Panda Bear does it again. 


Used to be that the most durable object on the planet was a bumper sticker.  So durable that they often outlasted the car.  In fact, you can still see the occasional Clinton-Gore offering, slightly faded but robust, grimly adherent to a lovingly maintained Nissan Sentra.  I mention this because I still see the occasional Obama bumper sticker proudly displayed by the vestiges of those still in abject thrall of the Serpent King Ra-Obama and although it has been less than a year, the stickers are faded, peeling, and look like something printed hastily in some North Korean re-education camp before the entire shift was taken out and shot.


Are You Having Problems Leaving Comments?

________________________________ 2 Outbursts

I received notice that a reader was having problems leaving comments.  I have not noticed anything on my end.  I have however noticed that when I try and leave a comment, it does not go through, but the comment, as typed, is still present in the que.  You just have to hit the submit button one more time.  I don't know why it does this.  Just remember.  If your comment does not post, it should still be there as typed.  Just hit the submit button again.


Now, if this isn't the problem you are experiencing, email me at happyhospitalistATgmailDOTcom.  I want to know if there are other problems.  When you send me a comment on the sidebar  in my comment form, I have no idea who you are so I can't respond to you.  

Also, I have had a few folks send me pictures from the sidebar as well.  They have always been blank.  If you are trying to send me a picture and I haven't posted it, more than likely, it's because I didn't get it.  There is a 2 megabyte limit on the pics.  So if your pic is larger than that, you will have to email it to me.

Happy

Is Telemetry Overused?

________________________________ 24 Outbursts

The Cleveland Clinic Journal of Medicine asks the question.


My answer is yes.  When I come on service and have an 85 + year old on telemetry  and get paged from an RN to tell me the patient had a 12 beat run of SVT, my solution is the only one.

Give a verbal order to discontinue telemetry.  

I can't count the number of times I see patients on telemetry that are paced. That have had stable sinus rhythm for six days.  That have intermittent bursts of insignificant SVT ( or even VT) in nursing home patients that haven't left their room in decades.  Telemetry has a way of finding disease you shouldn't want to find.  Stop looking so hard.  

There is no protocol for deciding if you need to be on telemetry. If you are a patient, and your doctor orders telemetry, ask them daily if you still need it.  Ask them if there is any evidence of concern.  More than likely the answer will be no.  More than likely the doctor ordered it and forgot about it.  There is no daily reminder system to discontinue it.

One thing I love about Happy's hospitalist group is our excellent RNs that preround on many patients, leaving notes of suggestion for us to address upon arrival at the chart.  One such suggestion is the constant reminder to discontinue telemetry.  

I seem to recall once that placing a patient on telemetry for just 24 hours costs at least $200 in direct hospital costs.  Happy's daily hospital census runs about 100.  Imagine if we could stop telemetry in just 3 patients a day.  $600 a day in hospital savings.  That's over $200,000 a year in savings.  

Great hospitalist programs pay for themselves many times over.  And why we bring value where ever you turn and look.

Rule #1: Be Nice

________________________________ 14 Outbursts

I try and follow this rule every single day. 


I wrote this post a long time ago when I first started blogging. I’m recycling the post because this information bears repeating. I’ve been seeing some behavior lately that is inappropriate, and I’m telling you this stuff for your own good. Please, never roll your eyes at a nurse who is old enough to be your mother. She may be going through menopause, and it could be the last thing that you ever do. Just sayin.’ Don’t make waves at the nurses station.
Doctor's save lives.  Nurses save doctors and lives.  Always remember to be nice to your nurse.  Sometimes I fail, but I never forget when I do and it makes me try harder the next time.

Monday, June 1, 2009

Abortion Doctor Shot And Killed In Wichita

________________________________ 12 Outbursts

Dr George Tiller , who performs late term abortions, was shot and killed while ushering in church yesterday.  This guy ha been through a lot.  In 1985, his clinic was bombed.  In 1993 he was shot in both arms.  And what he's doing is all legal under Kansas law.




In March, Tiller was acquitted of 19 misdemeanor charges that he performed abortions illegally, failing to follow state law and obtain a second opinion on late-term abortions.

Under Kansas state law, abortion is legal only when a doctor affirms that the fetus can't live independently outside of the mother's womb, also known as determining viability. If the fetus is viable, two doctors must attest that the abortion is necessary for the well-being of the mother's physical or mental health.

Abortion is such a hot button topic.   But I wonder why nobody feels the same about all the pain and suffering we put the elderly through by artificially keeping them alive with technology at the expense of allowing natural death.  Is this not the same?


Do Internists Have Confidence In Their Own Training When Compared To NPs?

________________________________ 5 Outbursts

My short answer is yes.  I gave the rest of my answer to this question posed on the ACP Advocacy Blog where an excellent discussion is occurring.  The American College of Physicians (ACP) has endorsed, and I shall say, fully short sighted endorsement, for the advancement of independent functioning medical home models managed by fully independent NPs.


I have to say, in order to get to yes, the ACP has abandoned their principles for appeasement of the team approach to care.  Unfortunately, there is no team approach in the push for independent NP medical home models.  It will be the death of outpatient internal medicine, a field already decimated by the superior payment model of hospitalist medicine and the vastly superior procedural oriented medical subspecialties.  Try and tell a medical student to enter outpatient internal medicine, when their NP colleague down the street accomplished the same goal in 5-6 years post of post high school education, what took you 11 years (but I would say closer to 17 or 18 NP equivalent years of post high school training).

You, as an outpatient internist, would have to be a fool to enter a life where your value is compared as equal with those far less trained to do what you can do.    You would have wasted 10 equivalent years of your life doing something that the whole world believes can be done by someone with 1/3 the time of dedicated study.

ACP, you have just put the dagger in the heart outpatient internal medicine.   Congratulations. You will forever have to live with this action.  An action that will be remembered for decades as the day outpatient internal medicine officially died.

I'll tell you right now how this is going to go down.  Patients who otherwise could have been taken care of by dedicated internists paid adequately (at least $50 per patient per month) in a medical home model will now be managed by NPs not capable of meeting the same educational standards for which internal medicine was founded on.   

With that said , ACP, I think you are asking the wrong question.  The question is not if we internists have confidence in our own training when compared with NPs.  I don't know one that wouldn't.   I think the question is rather: Are internists over qualified for outpatient medicine?  Perhaps that is what this discussion should be about.  By supporting NPs in their pursuit of independently run medical home models, it appears to me that the ACP's answer is yes.

Why?  Because if one is to believe that medical education offers something more than NP education, there is no alternative conclusion that can be made.  If you do not believe that MD education has anything to offer over an NP education, then all outpatient medical homes should be run by cheaper NPs.  And the medical home triage model, as a cost cutting endeavor of care is doomed to failure.    Running a medical home model is not about triage, it's about physician directed rationing of resources.  And that is done because internists are capable, from the education they have received, from managing a vastly superior arsenal of disease than NPs.  

Unfortunately we shall never prove my theory, as internists have officially abandoned ship on outpatient medicine.  

To the NPs out there, please don't flame me.  I know you mean well.  You really believe you are capable of doing this stuff independently.  And I agree.  Some of it you can.  As your training allows you some latitude.  But we both know the difference between nursing education and medical education (or maybe you don't).  It doesn't even come close to offering you the ability to practice the same scope as a board certified internist.   It's light years apart.  The part, as I see it,  that really makes the medical home work.  The part where internists lead the ship, not the current triage system they employ in the fee for service model of care.   I foresee under NP directed medical homes, the same type of triage medicine being performed, simply under a different payment model.

I know my knowledge base gives me the ability to manage independently, a vast array of medical conditions, that if given enough time in a clinic, would be handled by me, not referred to subspecialists as their easy bread and butter.  A knowledge base your education does not offer you.  Not because you are less of a person.  But you are less educated when compared to your internists running the same medical home.   

What you spend offering your patients in nursing education, you  lose in offering them medical education.  Perhaps you believe your nursing background and what you offer nursing wise makes up for your lack of expanded differential.  Perhaps your really believe you offer more to your patients because of your nursing background.  And in some circumstances you are right.  Many patients don't need a doctor.     So in that regards, your nursing degree will come in handy.  But lest they need a complex understanding of their medical disease and that's where your education will fail you.

Unless of course you surround yourself with only patients that don't rise to the level of complexity that an internist run medical home would otherwise experience.

So congratulations ACP.  In your hard left leaning pursuit of universal health care for all, you have abandoned your principles in favor of getting to yes.  With hospitalist medicine offering so much more job satisfaction than outpatient medicine, your position of supporting the independent NP medical home model would make the decision for any medical student even thinking about outpatient internal medicine made for them.

You have just killed the internist lead medical home model.  Congratulations.  And perhaps you have just killed your own society as well.

Oops.